Conditionals ? ('wut')

Hoon has the usual program control branches. It also has the usual logical operators: AND ?&, OR ?|, and NOT ?!. It also has a ?= rune that tests whether a value matches a given type. In the course of type inference, Hoon learns from ?= tests in the test condition of ?: ("wutcol") expressions.

Overview

All ? runes reduce to ?: and/or ?=.

If the condition of an ?: is a ?=, and the ?= is testing a leg of the subject, the compiler specializes the subject type for the branches of the ?:. Branch inference also works for expressions which expand to ?:.

The test does not have to be a single ?=; the compiler can analyze arbitrary boolean logic (?& ("wutpam"), ?| ("wutbar"), ?! ("wutzap")) with full short-circuiting. Equality tests (.= ("dottis")) are not analyzed.

If the compiler detects that the branch is degenerate (only one side is taken), it fails with an error.

`?|` "wutbar"

Logical OR.

Syntax

Variable number of arguments.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?\| p1 p2 p3 pn ==
Wide	?\|(p1 p2 p3 pn)
Irregular	\|(p1 p2 p3 pn)

AST

[%wtbr p=(list hoon)]

Expands to

Pseudocode: a, b, c, ... as elements of p:

?:(a & ?:(b & ?:(c & ?:(... ?:(z & |)))))

Desugaring

|-
?~  p
  |
?:  i.p
  &
$(p t.p)

Produces

If any argument evaluates to true (%.y), true. If all arguments evaluate to false (%.n), false.

Examples

> |(=(6 42) =(42 42))
%.y

> |(=(6 42) =(42 43))
%.n

`?-` "wuthep"

Switch against a union, with no default.

Syntax

One fixed argument, then a variable number of pairs.

Form	Syntax
Tall style #1	?- p q1a q1b q2a q2b qna qnb ==
Tall style #2	?- p q1a q1b :: q2a q2b :: qna qnb ==
Wide	?-(p q1a q1b, q2a q2b, qna qnb)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wthp p=wing q=(list (pair spec value))]

Expands to

Pseudocode: a, b, c, ... as elements of q:

?:  ?=(p.a p)  q.a
?:  ?=(p.b p)  q.b
?:  ?=(p.c p)  q.c
...
~|(%mint-lost !!)

Desugaring

|-
?.  q
  ~|(%mint-lost !!)
?:  ?=(p.i.q p)
  q.i.q
$(q t.q)

Discussion

The ?- rune is for a conditional expression in which the type of p determines which branch is taken. Usually the type of p is a union of other types. There is no default branch.

The compiler makes sure that your code neither misses a case of the union, nor includes a double case that isn't there. This is not special handling for ?-, just a consequence of the semantics of ?:, which ?- reduces to.

A missing case will throw the mint-lost error. An extra case will throw mint-vain.

Examples

> =cor  |=  vat=?(%a %b)
        ?-  vat
          %a  20
          %b  42
        ==

> (cor %a)
20

> (cor %b)
42

> (cor %c)
! nest-fail

`?:` "wutcol"

Branch on a boolean test.

Syntax

Three arguments, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?: p q r
Wide	?:(p q r)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtcl p=hoon q=hoon r=hoon]

Produces

If p produces true (%.y), then q. If p produces false (%.n), then r. If p is not a boolean, compiler yells at you.

Discussion

If test analysis reveals that either branch is never taken, or if p is not a boolean, compilation fails. An untaken branch is indicated with mint-lost.

Note also that all other branching expressions reduce to ?:.

Examples

> ?:((gth 1 0) 3 4)
3

> ?:  (gth 1 0)
    3
  4
3

> ?:((gth 1 2) 3 4)
4

> ?:  (gth 1 2)
    3
  4
4

`?.` "wutdot"

Branch on a boolean test, inverted.

Syntax

Three arguments, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?. p q r
Wide	?.(p q r)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtdt p=hoon q=hoon r=hoon]

Expands to

?:(p r q)

Discussion

?. is just like ?:, but with its last two subexpressions reversed.

As is usual with inverted forms, use ?. when the true-case expression is much taller and/or wider than the false-case expression.

Examples

> ?.((gth 1 2) 3 4)
3

> ?.(?=(%a 'a') %not-a %yup)
%yup

> ?.  %.y
    'this false case is less heavy than the true case'
  ?:  =(2 3)
    'two not equal to 3'
  'but see how \'r is much heavier than \'q?'
'but see how \'r is much heavier than \'q?'

`?^` "wutket"

Branch on whether a wing of the subject is a cell.

Syntax

Three arguments, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?^ p q r
Wide	?^(p q r)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtkt p=wing q=hoon r=hoon]

Expands to

?:(?=(^ p) q r)

Discussion

The type of the wing, p, must not be known to be either an atom or a cell, or else you'll get a mint-vain error at compile time. mint-vain means that one of the ?^ branches, q or r, is never taken.

Examples

> ?^(0 1 2)
! mint-vain
! exit

> ?^(`*`0 1 2)
2

> ?^(`*`[1 2] 3 4)
3

`?<` "wutgal"

Negative assertion.

Syntax

Two arguments, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?< p q
Wide	?<(p q)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtgl p=hoon q=hoon]

Expands to

?:(p !! q)

Discussion

?< is used to force a crash when some condition p doesn't yield false (%.n). It can be used for type inference with the ?= rune, much like the ?> rune.

Examples

> ?<(=(3 4) %foo)
%foo

> ?<(=(3 3) %foo)
dojo: hoon expression failed

> =a `*`[12 14]

> `^`a
nest-fail

> ?<(?=(@ a) `^`a)
[12 14]

`?>` "wutgar"

Positive assertion.

Syntax

Two arguments, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?> p q
Wide	?>(p q)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtgr p=hoon q=hoon]

Expands to

?.(p !! q)

Discussion

?> is used to force a crash when some condition p doesn't yield true (%.y). It can be used for type inference, with the ?= rune, to specify the type of a value.

Examples

> ?>(=(3 3) %foo)
%foo

> ?>(=(3 4) %foo)
dojo: hoon expression failed

> =a `*`123

> `@`a
nest-fail

> ?>(?=(@ a) `@`a)
123

`?+` "wutlus"

Switch against a union, with a default.

Syntax

Two fixed arguments, then a variable number of pairs.

Form	Syntax
Tall style #1	?+ p q r1a r1b r2a r2b rna rnb ==
Tall style #2	?+ p q r1a r1b :: r2a r2b :: rna rnb ==
Wide	?+(p q r1a r1b, r2a r2b, rna rnb)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtls p=wing q=hoon r=(list (pair spec hoon))]

Expands to

Pseudocode: a, b, c, ... as elements of r:

?:  ?=(p.a p)  q.a
?:  ?=(p.b p)  q.b
?:  ?=(p.c p)  q.c
...
q

Desugaring

|-
?.  r
  q
?:  ?=(p.i.r p)
  q.i.r
$(r t.r)

Discussion

The ?+ rune is for a conditional expression in which the type of p determines which branch is taken. Usually the type of p is a union of other types. If p's type doesn't match the case for any given branch, the default expression, q, is evaluated.

If there is a case that is never taken you'll get a mint-vain error.

Examples

> =cor  |=  vat=@tas
        ?+  vat  240
          %a  20
          %b  42
        ==

> (cor %a)
20

> (cor %b)
42

> (cor %c)
240

`?&` "wutpam"

Logical AND.

Syntax

Variable arguments.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?& p1 p2 pn ==
Wide	?&(p1 p2 pn)
Irregular	&(p1 p2 pn)

AST

[%wtpm p=(list hoon)]

Expands to

Pseudocode: a, b, c, ... as elements of p:

?.(a | ?.(b | ?.(c | ?.(... ?.(z | &)))))

Desugaring

|-
?~  p
  &
?.  i.p
  |
$(p t.p)

Produces

If ALL arguments evaluate to true (%.y), true (%.y). If one or more evalute to false (%.n), false (%.n).

Examples

> &(=(6 6) =(42 42))
%.y

> &(=(6 7) =(42 42))
%.n

`?@` "wutpat"

Branch on whether a wing of the subject is an atom.

Syntax

Three arguments, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?@ p q r
Wide	?@(p q r)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtpt p=wing q=hoon r=hoon]

Expands to

?:(?=(@ p) q r)

Produces

If p is an atom, q. If p is a cell, r.

Discussion

The type of the wing, p, must not be known to be either an atom or a cell, or else you'll get a mint-vain error at compile time. mint-vain means that one of the ?@ branches, q or r, is never taken.

Examples

> ?@(0 1 2)
! mint-vain
! exit

> ?@(`*`0 1 2)
1

> ?@(`*`[1 2] 3 4)
4

`?~` "wutsig"

Branch on whether a wing of the subject is null.

Syntax

Three arguments, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?~ p q r
Wide	?~(p q r)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtsg p=wing q=hoon r=hoon]

Expands to

?:(?=($~ p) q r)

Produces

If p is null (~), q. If p is non-null, r.

Discussion

It's bad style to use ?~ to test for any zero atom. Use it only for a true null, ~.

Examples

> =foo ""

> ?~(foo 1 2)
1

`?=` "wuttis"

Test pattern match.

Syntax

Two arguments, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?= p q
Wide	?=(p q)
Irregular	None.

AST

[%wtts p=spec q=wing]

Produces

%.y (true) if the noun at q is in the type of p; %.n (false) otherwise.

Discussion

?= is not as powerful as it might seem. For instance, it can't generate a loop -- you cannot (and should not) use it to test whether a * is a (list @). Nor can it validate atomic auras.

Patterns should be as weak as possible. Unpack one layer of union at a time. Don't confirm things the type system knows.

For example, when matching from a tagged union for the type [%foo p=@ q=[@ @]], the appropriate pattern is [%foo *]. You have one question, which is whether the head of the noun is %foo.

A common error is find.$, meaning p is not a type.

Examples

> =bar [%foo %bar %baz]
> ?=([%foo *] bar)
%.y

`?!` "wutzap"

Logical NOT.

Syntax

One argument, fixed.

Form	Syntax
Tall	?! p
Wide	?!(p)
Irregular	!p

AST

[%wtzp p=hoon]

Expands to

.=(| p)

Produces

The logical NOT of p, which must evaluate to either %.y or %.n.

Examples

~zod:dojo> ?!(.=(1 2))
%.y

~zod:dojo> !&
%.n

~zod:dojo> !|
%.y

~zod:dojo> !(gth 5 6)
%.y

Overview

?| "wutbar"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Desugaring

Produces

Examples

?- "wuthep"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Desugaring

Discussion

Examples

?: "wutcol"

Syntax

AST

Produces

Discussion

Examples

?. "wutdot"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Discussion

Examples

?^ "wutket"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Discussion

Examples

?< "wutgal"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Discussion

Examples

?> "wutgar"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Discussion

Examples

?+ "wutlus"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Desugaring

Discussion

Examples

?& "wutpam"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Desugaring

Produces

Examples

?@ "wutpat"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Produces

Discussion

Examples

?~ "wutsig"

Syntax

AST

Expands to

Produces

Discussion

Examples

?= "wuttis"

Syntax

AST

Produces

Discussion

Examples

`?|` "wutbar"

`?-` "wuthep"

`?:` "wutcol"

`?.` "wutdot"

`?^` "wutket"

`?<` "wutgal"

`?>` "wutgar"

`?+` "wutlus"

`?&` "wutpam"

`?@` "wutpat"

`?~` "wutsig"

`?=` "wuttis"

`?!` "wutzap"