Completion Rubric¶

Page Maps¶

graph LR
  family["Python Programming"]
  program["Python Functional Programming"]
  section["Reference"]
  page["Completion Rubric"]
  capstone["Capstone evidence"]

  family --> program --> section --> page
  page -.applies in.-> capstone

flowchart LR
  orient["Orient on the page map"] --> read["Read the main claim and examples"]
  read --> inspect["Inspect the related code, proof, or capstone surface"]
  inspect --> verify["Run or review the verification path"]
  verify --> apply["Apply the idea back to the module and capstone"]

Use this page when you need to decide whether functional-programming understanding is actually complete or only familiar.

Completion standard¶

You should be able to do all of the following:

explain which part of a design is pure and which part is an effect boundary
distinguish value modelling, failure modelling, and orchestration concerns clearly
justify one choice about laziness, materialization, or retries without hand-waving
name the proof route that would fail first if a claimed functional boundary drifted
review a pipeline or capstone change in terms of ownership, dataflow, and proof

Course outcomes¶

Area	Completion signal
purity and substitution	you can explain what changes when hidden state enters a function and why that matters
dataflow and composition	you can read a pipeline and name where transformation, aggregation, and coordination belong
failures as values	you can compare explicit failure modelling with exception-shaped ambiguity
effect boundaries	you can defend where adapters, resources, and async shells should start
sustainment	you can write one review judgment backed by one guide, one file, and one proof route

Capstone evidence¶

Use these as the minimum capstone evidence:

make PROGRAM=python-programming/python-functional-programming capstone-walkthrough
make PROGRAM=python-programming/python-functional-programming capstone-test
make PROGRAM=python-programming/python-functional-programming test

Running them is not enough if you cannot explain what each route proved.

Reviewer questions¶

Which package stays pure here?
Which boundary owns the effectful part?
Which failure is represented explicitly rather than hidden?
Which proof route should another reviewer trust first?