Review public API boundaries, locked exposure, and transitive imports — Review and demonstrate

PART I

Warm-up

Reconnect with a useful idea before starting review public api boundaries, locked exposure, and transitive imports. 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

Review the transitive action map

A dependency graph explains where code and visible names come from. It does not transfer an author’s privileges or remove checks on a downstream operation. Follow the path to the actual host action, then evaluate that action using the current execution’s authority.

Exercise graph: screen imports report; report imports catalog and exportHelper. catalog performs a read; exportHelper requests an export. Current caller’s grants allow reading Public, deny reading Staff and do not include export. Module names are host-contract labels, not extra standard libraries or executable import syntax.

Supplied case: Graph lists module arrows but no terminal resources, operations or caller contexts.

Worked reasoning: Add action annotations at the host boundary: read Public allowed, read Staff refused and export Public refused for the stated caller. The graph then explains both dependency provenance and actual authority decisions.

Contrast and diagnosis: A visually complete graph can remain semantically incomplete if it omits the operations that matter.

Worked reasoning and supplied artifact

// Disposable exercise fixture / host-contract notes; not executable API syntax.
// Supplied input: Graph lists module arrows but no terminal resources, operations or caller contexts.
// Worked prediction: Add action annotations at the host boundary: read Public allowed, read Staff refused and export Public refused for the stated caller. The graph then explains both dependency provenance and actual authority decisions.
// Rejected alternative: A visually complete graph can remain semantically incomplete if it omits the operations that matter.

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

Reconstruct the supplied worked case first: list its inputs, intermediate decisions and final artifact. Compare each row with the explanation and identify exactly where the rejected alternative fails. Then use the changed inputs in Part IV for independent work.

• 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: Approved API inventory. Build a small, understandable change around review public api boundaries, locked exposure, and transitive imports.

Deliver a graph plus three terminal-action traces and one dependency-update diff. Identify unresolved host module-loading rules separately.

What to produce

Deliver a graph plus three terminal-action traces and one dependency-update diff. Identify unresolved host module-loading rules separately. Include input → intermediate decision/state → predicted outcome, with any required host rule stated explicitly.

• 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.

import wdb;
domain Inventory {
    const lowStock = wdb.query({
        from: products,
        select: [id, name, stock],
        where: [[ stock < 10 ]],
        order: { by: stock, direction: ascending }
    });
}

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.

• Review the transitive action map
• Explain the decision for the supplied case, then independently work the changed fixture.
• Separate source-backed behavior, host requirements and untested predictions.

One small recap task

In one or two sentences, name the decisive rule in “Review the transitive action map” and predict the outcome of one changed input from your independent fixture. State which host behavior still needs real verification.

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