attributes:
      label: Desired Behavior
      description: What do you want it to do instead?
    validations:
      required: true

  - type: markdown
    attributes:
      value: >
        Did you *actually* encounter the need for this enhancement in a real-world scenario, or does
        it just seem like a sensible behavior for the feature to have?

 * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
 * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
 * limitations under the License.
 */
package okhttp3.internal.idn

import kotlin.test.Test
import kotlin.test.assertEquals
import kotlin.test.assertNull

class PunycodeTest {
  /** https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3492#section-7.1 */
  @Test fun rfc3492Samples() {

		"bytes=+3-+5",
		"bytes=10-11,12-10", // Unsupported by S3/MinIO (valid in RFC)
	}
	for i, urs := range unparsableRangeSpecs {
		rs, err := parseRequestRangeSpec(urs)
		if err == nil {
			t.Errorf("Case %d: Did not get an expected error - got %v", i, rs)
		}
		if isErrInvalidRange(err) {
			t.Errorf("Case %d: Got invalid range error instead of a parse error", i)
		}
		if rs != nil {

	}
	atomic.AddInt64(&r.srStats.ReplicaSize, sz)
	atomic.AddInt64(&r.srStats.ReplicaCount, 1)
}

func (r *ReplicationStats) srUpdate(sr replStat) {
	dID, err := globalSiteReplicationSys.getDeplIDForEndpoint(sr.endpoint())
	if err == nil {
		r.srStats.update(sr, dID)
	}
}

// Update updates in-memory replication statistics with new values.

     */
    int DCERPC_RESERVED_1 = 0x08;
    /**
     * Supports concurrent multiplexing flag.
     */
    int DCERPC_CONC_MPX = 0x10; /* supports concurrent multiplexing */
    /**
     * Did not execute flag - indicates request was not executed
     */
    int DCERPC_DID_NOT_EXECUTE = 0x20;
    /**
     * Maybe flag - indicates 'maybe' call semantics requested
     */

            Thread.interrupted();
            if (interruptingThread.isAlive()) {
              // This will be hidden by test-output redirection:
              logger.severe("InterruptenatorTask did not exit; future tests may be affected");
              /*
               * This won't do any good under JUnit 3, but I'll leave it around in
               * case we ever switch to JUnit 4:
               */

   * of a call to {@code remove()}. Thus, the expectation doesn't hold that {@code map.remove(x)}
   * returns the same value which {@code map.get(x)} did immediately beforehand.
   */
  @Override
  public void testRemove() {
    Map<String, Collection<Integer>> map;
    try {
      map = makePopulatedMap();
    } catch (UnsupportedOperationException e) {

    @Override
    ListenableFuture<V> runInterruptibly() throws Exception {
      return checkNotNull(
          callable.call(),
          "AsyncCallable.call returned null instead of a Future. "
              + "Did you mean to return immediateFuture(null)? %s",
          callable);
    }

    @Override
    void afterRanInterruptiblySuccess(ListenableFuture<V> result) {
      setFuture(result);
    }

    @Override

http://%ef%bc%85%ef%bc%94%ef%bc%91.com

# ...%00 in fullwidth should fail (also as escaped UTF-8 input)
http://\uff05\uff10\uff10.com
http://%ef%bc%85%ef%bc%90%ef%bc%90.com

# Basic IDN support, UTF-8 and UTF-16 input should be converted to IDN
http://\u4f60\u597d\u4f60\u597d  s:http p:/ h:xn--6qqa088eba

# Invalid escaped characters should fail and the percents should be
# escaped. https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24191

    }

    /**
     * Setup exactly the same as the above test, except that the child project
     * now depends upon d, which has a transitive dependency on c.  Even though
     * we did list an exclusion on c, it was only from within the context of
     * project b.  We will pick up project c in this case because no
     * restrictions were placed on d.  This demonstrates that a, b, c, & d will