Names, parameters, and return types — Flash-check repair

PART I

Warm-up

Reconnect with a useful idea before starting names, parameters, and return types. In one or two sentences, describe the input, output or host boundary from the previous exercise that this lesson builds on. If you are arriving directly, skim the worked example first; there is no locked prerequisite.

A rough note is enough. You can revise it after the example.

PART II

Instruction & guided example

Repair a stale name without changing the rule

A rename defect can look like an arithmetic defect because the intended result is missing. Inspect name consistency before redesigning the formula. The task is to preserve the rule while repairing the reference that no longer names a declared parameter.

The helper declares itemCount but returns quantity * unitPrice. quantity is not a parameter in this snippet. Replacing quantity with itemCount reconnects the expression to the declared input. Then cost(3,80) predicts 240. This is a static diagnosis and a paper trace, not a claim about a compiler message on this site.

Renaming itemCount back to quantity everywhere would also restore consistency, but mixing the two spellings does not. Avoid adding a hidden global quantity to make the reference work: that would change the helper from a transparent input-based calculation to an undeclared dependency.

Worked reasoning and supplied artifact

// Broken after an incomplete rename.
fnc cost(itemCount: i32, unitPrice: i32) -> i32 {
    return quantity * unitPrice;
}

Illustrative example from the proposed WillowScript design. The language and WUIX/WMATH/WDB/WAUDIO/WTMP services are not implemented in the supplied source. This site has no interpreter, VM or native host and does not execute or certify the snippet.

Try the guided change

Mark each declared name and each body reference, identify the unmatched name, then make the one-reference repair.

• Write the supplied inputs and initial state before following the example.
• Reconstruct each intermediate calculation or host decision, then compare with the worked artifact.
• Explain why the contrasting alternative fails before attempting the changed inputs in Part IV.

PART III

Take a breather

Step back after the guided example. Look away from the screen, stretch, or reread your prediction. This is an optional learning pause, not a timer or an assessment gate.

When you return, try to name the lesson’s key idea without copying its wording. If that feels difficult, return to Part II and trace one line rather than restarting the entire lesson.

PART IV

Independent practice

Project context: Snack-shop calculator. Build a small, understandable change around names, parameters, and return types.

Repair a helper that declares totalSlots but returns totalslots - occupied. Explain the exact spelling difference and provide a trace for (12,5).

What to produce

A corrected case-sensitive reference, a declaration/use map and the predicted result 7.

• State the intended behavior in a sentence before editing.
• Use only source-backed syntax and the host services whose contract you have been given.
• Record a normal case and a boundary or unavailable-resource case.
• Label hand predictions separately from anything actually measured in a supplied toolchain.

Syntax colors are a reading aid, not a compiler. The line you are editing stays uncolored until you move to a different line; capitalization is never changed. Drafts stay on this browser and code is not executed.

fnc add(a: i32, b: i32) -> i32 {
    return a + b;
}
fnc main() -> i32 {
    return add(2, 3);
}

PART V

Self-check

Use this check to notice what to revisit. It does not award a private course grade, block another page or claim to verify compiled code. Every answer has a learning explanation.

You may keep exploring even if you are unsure. Use the hint, compare the trace, and revise your explanation.

PART VI

Recap & small task

Bring the idea back to the mod feature you are building. A useful recap connects the mechanism to a decision you can make in your own code.

• Repair a stale name without changing the rule
• A rename defect can look like an arithmetic defect because the intended result is missing. Inspect name consistency before redesigning the formula. The task is to preserve the rule while repairing the reference that no longer names a declared parameter.
• Separate source-backed behavior, host requirements and untested predictions.

One small recap task

Write one check you can do on paper before asking a real compiler to check name resolution.

This marks your personal practice record only. It is not a certification or an official workspace assessment.