Types after names — Review and demonstrate

PART I

Warm-up

Reconnect with a useful idea before starting types after names. 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.

Recall note

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

PART II

Instruction & guided example

Write a type-and-meaning review table

A type review records both the declared kind and the feature meaning of every value. Two values may share i32 yet represent different units; two helpers may accept the same inputs yet return different kinds. Review these dimensions together instead of relying on names alone.

For capacity 12 and used 7, remaining returns i32 value 5 slots, while available returns bool value true. A useful review table lists inputs, expression, result kind, result meaning and hand prediction. At used 12, those predictions become 0 slots and false, confirming the full boundary.

A result table is not a real compiler report. It supports understanding and identifies obvious mismatches, but a supplied toolchain is still needed for verified diagnostics. Likewise, feature constraints such as used ≤ capacity need explicit policy or validation.

Worked reasoning and supplied artifact

fnc remaining(capacity: i32, used: i32) -> i32 {
    return capacity - used;
}
fnc available(capacity: i32, used: i32) -> bool {
    return used < capacity;
}

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.

Walk through the example, one line at a time

fnc remaining(capacity: i32, used: i32) -> i32 {
Read the function name, its parameter names/types and the result type after ->. This is the contract the body must satisfy.
return capacity - used;
Evaluate the following expression using the current values, then send its result to the caller. Explain the value; do not confuse it with printed output.
}
Close the nested block or value begun earlier. Match it to its opening boundary to keep the structure readable.
fnc available(capacity: i32, used: i32) -> bool {
Read the function name, its parameter names/types and the result type after ->. This is the contract the body must satisfy.
return used < capacity;
Evaluate the following expression using the current values, then send its result to the caller. Explain the value; do not confuse it with printed output.
}
Close the nested block or value begun earlier. Match it to its opening boundary to keep the structure readable.

Try the guided change

Build the table for (12,7) and (12,12), including result kind and unit where applicable.

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.

Prediction or guided notes

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.

Your drafts remain here. Continue whenever you are ready.

PART IV

Independent practice

Project context: Workshop stock counter. Build a small, understandable change around types after names.

Review a pair of helpers for total reward points and whether reward is positive. Include ordinary, zero and negative-total cases. Classify a deliberately wrong Boolean argument separately from negative numeric inputs.

What to produce

A type/meaning matrix, three valid-kind paper cases and one parameter-kind mismatch without a fabricated run.

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.

Your .ws practice draft

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.

Need a hint?

Original learning-path task and reference

In a museum exhibit console, demonstrate types after names. Submit source, acceptance cases, and an explanation proving the section objective. Include .ws source and a host-resource contract; compare at least one normal case and one edge case.

fnc total() -> i32 {
    vary count: i32 = 1;
    const bonus: i32 = 2;
    count += bonus;
    return count;
}

Where the original task needs a host API that is not supplied here, write the contract and predictions. Do not invent a runtime result.

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.

Which table row correctly separates type and meaning?i32; 5 remaining slotsbool; 5 remaining slotsi32; true

Explain a normal or boundary case

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.

Write a type-and-meaning review table
A type review records both the declared kind and the feature meaning of every value. Two values may share i32 yet represent different units; two helpers may accept the same inputs yet return different kinds. Review these dimensions together instead of relying on names alone.
Separate source-backed behavior, host requirements and untested predictions.

One small recap task

Add one feature-range assumption that the parameter types alone do not establish.

Your recap

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