Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
use std::cmp::Ordering;
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
use crate::{
|
|
|
|
texture_atlas::{TextureAtlas, TextureAtlasSprite},
|
2022-09-02 12:35:23 +00:00
|
|
|
Sprite, SPRITE_SHADER_HANDLE,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_asset::{AssetEvent, Assets, Handle, HandleId};
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_core_pipeline::{core_2d::Transparent2d, tonemapping::Tonemapping};
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_ecs::{
|
|
|
|
prelude::*,
|
2022-10-10 16:10:05 +00:00
|
|
|
system::{lifetimeless::*, SystemParamItem, SystemState},
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
2022-09-02 12:35:23 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_math::{Rect, Vec2};
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_reflect::Uuid;
|
2020-05-30 19:31:04 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_render::{
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
color::Color,
|
|
|
|
render_asset::RenderAssets,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
render_phase::{
|
2023-01-04 01:13:30 +00:00
|
|
|
BatchedPhaseItem, DrawFunctions, PhaseItem, RenderCommand, RenderCommandResult,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
RenderPhase, SetItemPipeline, TrackedRenderPass,
|
|
|
|
},
|
Migrate to encase from crevice (#4339)
# Objective
- Unify buffer APIs
- Also see #4272
## Solution
- Replace vendored `crevice` with `encase`
---
## Changelog
Changed `StorageBuffer`
Added `DynamicStorageBuffer`
Replaced `UniformVec` with `UniformBuffer`
Replaced `DynamicUniformVec` with `DynamicUniformBuffer`
## Migration Guide
### `StorageBuffer`
removed `set_body()`, `values()`, `values_mut()`, `clear()`, `push()`, `append()`
added `set()`, `get()`, `get_mut()`
### `UniformVec` -> `UniformBuffer`
renamed `uniform_buffer()` to `buffer()`
removed `len()`, `is_empty()`, `capacity()`, `push()`, `reserve()`, `clear()`, `values()`
added `set()`, `get()`
### `DynamicUniformVec` -> `DynamicUniformBuffer`
renamed `uniform_buffer()` to `buffer()`
removed `capacity()`, `reserve()`
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-05-18 21:09:21 +00:00
|
|
|
render_resource::*,
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
renderer::{RenderDevice, RenderQueue},
|
|
|
|
texture::{
|
|
|
|
BevyDefault, DefaultImageSampler, GpuImage, Image, ImageSampler, TextureFormatPixelInfo,
|
|
|
|
},
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
view::{
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
ComputedVisibility, ExtractedView, Msaa, ViewTarget, ViewUniform, ViewUniformOffset,
|
|
|
|
ViewUniforms, VisibleEntities,
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
},
|
Make `RenderStage::Extract` run on the render world (#4402)
# Objective
- Currently, the `Extract` `RenderStage` is executed on the main world, with the render world available as a resource.
- However, when needing access to resources in the render world (e.g. to mutate them), the only way to do so was to get exclusive access to the whole `RenderWorld` resource.
- This meant that effectively only one extract which wrote to resources could run at a time.
- We didn't previously make `Extract`ing writing to the world a non-happy path, even though we want to discourage that.
## Solution
- Move the extract stage to run on the render world.
- Add the main world as a `MainWorld` resource.
- Add an `Extract` `SystemParam` as a convenience to access a (read only) `SystemParam` in the main world during `Extract`.
## Future work
It should be possible to avoid needing to use `get_or_spawn` for the render commands, since now the `Commands`' `Entities` matches up with the world being executed on.
We need to determine how this interacts with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3519
It's theoretically possible to remove the need for the `value` method on `Extract`. However, that requires slightly changing the `SystemParam` interface, which would make it more complicated. That would probably mess up the `SystemState` api too.
## Todo
I still need to add doc comments to `Extract`.
---
## Changelog
### Changed
- The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase.
Resources on the render world can now be accessed using `ResMut` during extract.
### Removed
- `Commands::spawn_and_forget`. Use `Commands::get_or_spawn(e).insert_bundle(bundle)` instead
## Migration Guide
The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase. `Extract` takes a single type parameter, which is any system parameter (such as `Res`, `Query` etc.). It will extract this from the main world, and returns the result of this extraction when `value` is called on it.
For example, if previously your extract system looked like:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
for cloud in clouds.iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
the new version would be:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
The diff is:
```diff
--- a/src/clouds.rs
+++ b/src/clouds.rs
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
- for cloud in clouds.iter() {
+fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
+ for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
You can now also access resources from the render world using the normal system parameters during `Extract`:
```rust
fn extract_assets(mut render_assets: ResMut<MyAssets>, source_assets: Extract<Res<MyAssets>>) {
*render_assets = source_assets.clone();
}
```
Please note that all existing extract systems need to be updated to match this new style; even if they currently compile they will not run as expected. A warning will be emitted on a best-effort basis if this is not met.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-08 23:56:33 +00:00
|
|
|
Extract,
|
2020-05-30 19:31:04 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_transform::components::GlobalTransform;
|
2022-04-27 18:02:05 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_utils::FloatOrd;
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
use bevy_utils::HashMap;
|
|
|
|
use bytemuck::{Pod, Zeroable};
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
use fixedbitset::FixedBitSet;
|
2020-05-30 19:31:04 +00:00
|
|
|
|
Make `Resource` trait opt-in, requiring `#[derive(Resource)]` V2 (#5577)
*This PR description is an edited copy of #5007, written by @alice-i-cecile.*
# Objective
Follow-up to https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/2254. The `Resource` trait currently has a blanket implementation for all types that meet its bounds.
While ergonomic, this results in several drawbacks:
* it is possible to make confusing, silent mistakes such as inserting a function pointer (Foo) rather than a value (Foo::Bar) as a resource
* it is challenging to discover if a type is intended to be used as a resource
* we cannot later add customization options (see the [RFC](https://github.com/bevyengine/rfcs/blob/main/rfcs/27-derive-component.md) for the equivalent choice for Component).
* dependencies can use the same Rust type as a resource in invisibly conflicting ways
* raw Rust types used as resources cannot preserve privacy appropriately, as anyone able to access that type can read and write to internal values
* we cannot capture a definitive list of possible resources to display to users in an editor
## Notes to reviewers
* Review this commit-by-commit; there's effectively no back-tracking and there's a lot of churn in some of these commits.
*ira: My commits are not as well organized :')*
* I've relaxed the bound on Local to Send + Sync + 'static: I don't think these concerns apply there, so this can keep things simple. Storing e.g. a u32 in a Local is fine, because there's a variable name attached explaining what it does.
* I think this is a bad place for the Resource trait to live, but I've left it in place to make reviewing easier. IMO that's best tackled with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/4981.
## Changelog
`Resource` is no longer automatically implemented for all matching types. Instead, use the new `#[derive(Resource)]` macro.
## Migration Guide
Add `#[derive(Resource)]` to all types you are using as a resource.
If you are using a third party type as a resource, wrap it in a tuple struct to bypass orphan rules. Consider deriving `Deref` and `DerefMut` to improve ergonomics.
`ClearColor` no longer implements `Component`. Using `ClearColor` as a component in 0.8 did nothing.
Use the `ClearColorConfig` in the `Camera3d` and `Camera2d` components instead.
Co-authored-by: Alice <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: devil-ira <justthecooldude@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-08-08 21:36:35 +00:00
|
|
|
#[derive(Resource)]
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct SpritePipeline {
|
|
|
|
view_layout: BindGroupLayout,
|
|
|
|
material_layout: BindGroupLayout,
|
2022-10-10 16:10:05 +00:00
|
|
|
pub dummy_white_gpu_image: GpuImage,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
impl FromWorld for SpritePipeline {
|
|
|
|
fn from_world(world: &mut World) -> Self {
|
2022-10-10 16:10:05 +00:00
|
|
|
let mut system_state: SystemState<(
|
|
|
|
Res<RenderDevice>,
|
|
|
|
Res<DefaultImageSampler>,
|
|
|
|
Res<RenderQueue>,
|
|
|
|
)> = SystemState::new(world);
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
let (render_device, default_sampler, render_queue) = system_state.get_mut(world);
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let view_layout = render_device.create_bind_group_layout(&BindGroupLayoutDescriptor {
|
|
|
|
entries: &[BindGroupLayoutEntry {
|
|
|
|
binding: 0,
|
|
|
|
visibility: ShaderStages::VERTEX | ShaderStages::FRAGMENT,
|
|
|
|
ty: BindingType::Buffer {
|
|
|
|
ty: BufferBindingType::Uniform,
|
|
|
|
has_dynamic_offset: true,
|
Migrate to encase from crevice (#4339)
# Objective
- Unify buffer APIs
- Also see #4272
## Solution
- Replace vendored `crevice` with `encase`
---
## Changelog
Changed `StorageBuffer`
Added `DynamicStorageBuffer`
Replaced `UniformVec` with `UniformBuffer`
Replaced `DynamicUniformVec` with `DynamicUniformBuffer`
## Migration Guide
### `StorageBuffer`
removed `set_body()`, `values()`, `values_mut()`, `clear()`, `push()`, `append()`
added `set()`, `get()`, `get_mut()`
### `UniformVec` -> `UniformBuffer`
renamed `uniform_buffer()` to `buffer()`
removed `len()`, `is_empty()`, `capacity()`, `push()`, `reserve()`, `clear()`, `values()`
added `set()`, `get()`
### `DynamicUniformVec` -> `DynamicUniformBuffer`
renamed `uniform_buffer()` to `buffer()`
removed `capacity()`, `reserve()`
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-05-18 21:09:21 +00:00
|
|
|
min_binding_size: Some(ViewUniform::min_size()),
|
2021-05-02 20:45:25 +00:00
|
|
|
},
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
count: None,
|
|
|
|
}],
|
|
|
|
label: Some("sprite_view_layout"),
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let material_layout = render_device.create_bind_group_layout(&BindGroupLayoutDescriptor {
|
|
|
|
entries: &[
|
|
|
|
BindGroupLayoutEntry {
|
|
|
|
binding: 0,
|
|
|
|
visibility: ShaderStages::FRAGMENT,
|
|
|
|
ty: BindingType::Texture {
|
|
|
|
multisampled: false,
|
|
|
|
sample_type: TextureSampleType::Float { filterable: true },
|
|
|
|
view_dimension: TextureViewDimension::D2,
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
count: None,
|
2021-05-02 20:45:25 +00:00
|
|
|
},
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
BindGroupLayoutEntry {
|
|
|
|
binding: 1,
|
|
|
|
visibility: ShaderStages::FRAGMENT,
|
2021-12-19 03:03:06 +00:00
|
|
|
ty: BindingType::Sampler(SamplerBindingType::Filtering),
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
count: None,
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
label: Some("sprite_material_layout"),
|
|
|
|
});
|
2022-10-10 16:10:05 +00:00
|
|
|
let dummy_white_gpu_image = {
|
|
|
|
let image = Image::new_fill(
|
|
|
|
Extent3d::default(),
|
|
|
|
TextureDimension::D2,
|
|
|
|
&[255u8; 4],
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
TextureFormat::bevy_default(),
|
2022-10-10 16:10:05 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
let texture = render_device.create_texture(&image.texture_descriptor);
|
|
|
|
let sampler = match image.sampler_descriptor {
|
|
|
|
ImageSampler::Default => (**default_sampler).clone(),
|
|
|
|
ImageSampler::Descriptor(descriptor) => render_device.create_sampler(&descriptor),
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let format_size = image.texture_descriptor.format.pixel_size();
|
|
|
|
render_queue.write_texture(
|
|
|
|
ImageCopyTexture {
|
|
|
|
texture: &texture,
|
|
|
|
mip_level: 0,
|
|
|
|
origin: Origin3d::ZERO,
|
|
|
|
aspect: TextureAspect::All,
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
&image.data,
|
|
|
|
ImageDataLayout {
|
|
|
|
offset: 0,
|
|
|
|
bytes_per_row: Some(
|
|
|
|
std::num::NonZeroU32::new(
|
|
|
|
image.texture_descriptor.size.width * format_size as u32,
|
|
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
.unwrap(),
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
rows_per_image: None,
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
image.texture_descriptor.size,
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
let texture_view = texture.create_view(&TextureViewDescriptor::default());
|
|
|
|
GpuImage {
|
|
|
|
texture,
|
|
|
|
texture_view,
|
|
|
|
texture_format: image.texture_descriptor.format,
|
|
|
|
sampler,
|
|
|
|
size: Vec2::new(
|
|
|
|
image.texture_descriptor.size.width as f32,
|
|
|
|
image.texture_descriptor.size.height as f32,
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SpritePipeline {
|
|
|
|
view_layout,
|
|
|
|
material_layout,
|
2022-10-10 16:10:05 +00:00
|
|
|
dummy_white_gpu_image,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2020-06-02 02:23:11 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
bitflags::bitflags! {
|
|
|
|
#[repr(transparent)]
|
|
|
|
// NOTE: Apparently quadro drivers support up to 64x MSAA.
|
2022-08-30 03:00:39 +00:00
|
|
|
// MSAA uses the highest 3 bits for the MSAA log2(sample count) to support up to 128x MSAA.
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct SpritePipelineKey: u32 {
|
|
|
|
const NONE = 0;
|
|
|
|
const COLORED = (1 << 0);
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
const HDR = (1 << 1);
|
|
|
|
const TONEMAP_IN_SHADER = (1 << 2);
|
Fix color banding by dithering image before quantization (#5264)
# Objective
- Closes #5262
- Fix color banding caused by quantization.
## Solution
- Adds dithering to the tonemapping node from #3425.
- This is inspired by Godot's default "debanding" shader: https://gist.github.com/belzecue/
- Unlike Godot:
- debanding happens after tonemapping. My understanding is that this is preferred, because we are running the debanding at the last moment before quantization (`[f32, f32, f32, f32]` -> `f32`). This ensures we aren't biasing the dithering strength by applying it in a different (linear) color space.
- This code instead uses and reference the origin source, Valve at GDC 2015
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-44-46](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218880-70f4cdab-a1ed-44de-a88c-8759e77197f1.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-41-11](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218883-72393352-b162-41da-88bb-6e54a1e26853.png)
## Additional Notes
Real time rendering to standard dynamic range outputs is limited to 8 bits of depth per color channel. Internally we keep everything in full 32-bit precision (`vec4<f32>`) inside passes and 16-bit between passes until the image is ready to be displayed, at which point the GPU implicitly converts our `vec4<f32>` into a single 32bit value per pixel, with each channel (rgba) getting 8 of those 32 bits.
### The Problem
8 bits of color depth is simply not enough precision to make each step invisible - we only have 256 values per channel! Human vision can perceive steps in luma to about 14 bits of precision. When drawing a very slight gradient, the transition between steps become visible because with a gradient, neighboring pixels will all jump to the next "step" of precision at the same time.
### The Solution
One solution is to simply output in HDR - more bits of color data means the transition between bands will become smaller. However, not everyone has hardware that supports 10+ bit color depth. Additionally, 10 bit color doesn't even fully solve the issue, banding will result in coherent bands on shallow gradients, but the steps will be harder to perceive.
The solution in this PR adds noise to the signal before it is "quantized" or resampled from 32 to 8 bits. Done naively, it's easy to add unneeded noise to the image. To ensure dithering is correct and absolutely minimal, noise is adding *within* one step of the output color depth. When converting from the 32bit to 8bit signal, the value is rounded to the nearest 8 bit value (0 - 255). Banding occurs around the transition from one value to the next, let's say from 50-51. Dithering will never add more than +/-0.5 bits of noise, so the pixels near this transition might round to 50 instead of 51 but will never round more than one step. This means that the output image won't have excess variance:
- in a gradient from 49 to 51, there will be a step between each band at 49, 50, and 51.
- Done correctly, the modified image of this gradient will never have a adjacent pixels more than one step (0-255) from each other.
- I.e. when scanning across the gradient you should expect to see:
```
|-band-| |-band-| |-band-|
Baseline: 49 49 49 50 50 50 51 51 51
Dithered: 49 50 49 50 50 51 50 51 51
Dithered (wrong): 49 50 51 49 50 51 49 51 50
```
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-12-36](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219075-ab3f46be-d4e9-4869-b66b-a92e1706f49e.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-11-48](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219079-ec5d2add-817d-487a-8fc1-84569c9cda73.png)
You can see from above how correct dithering "fuzzes" the transition between bands to reduce distinct steps in color, without adding excess noise.
### HDR
The previous section (and this PR) assumes the final output is to an 8-bit texture, however this is not always the case. When Bevy adds HDR support, the dithering code will need to take the per-channel depth into account instead of assuming it to be 0-255. Edit: I talked with Rob about this and it seems like the current solution is okay. We may need to revisit once we have actual HDR final image output.
---
## Changelog
### Added
- All pipelines now support deband dithering. This is enabled by default in 3D, and can be toggled in the `Tonemapping` component in camera bundles. Banding is a graphical artifact created when the rendered image is crunched from high precision (f32 per color channel) down to the final output (u8 per channel in SDR). This results in subtle gradients becoming blocky due to the reduced color precision. Deband dithering applies a small amount of noise to the signal before it is "crunched", which breaks up the hard edges of blocks (bands) of color. Note that this does not add excess noise to the image, as the amount of noise is less than a single step of a color channel - just enough to break up the transition between color blocks in a gradient.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-11-11 19:43:45 +00:00
|
|
|
const DEBAND_DITHER = (1 << 3);
|
2022-08-30 03:00:39 +00:00
|
|
|
const MSAA_RESERVED_BITS = Self::MSAA_MASK_BITS << Self::MSAA_SHIFT_BITS;
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
impl SpritePipelineKey {
|
2022-08-30 03:00:39 +00:00
|
|
|
const MSAA_MASK_BITS: u32 = 0b111;
|
|
|
|
const MSAA_SHIFT_BITS: u32 = 32 - Self::MSAA_MASK_BITS.count_ones();
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2022-12-25 00:23:14 +00:00
|
|
|
#[inline]
|
|
|
|
pub const fn from_msaa_samples(msaa_samples: u32) -> Self {
|
2022-08-30 03:00:39 +00:00
|
|
|
let msaa_bits =
|
|
|
|
(msaa_samples.trailing_zeros() & Self::MSAA_MASK_BITS) << Self::MSAA_SHIFT_BITS;
|
2022-12-25 00:23:14 +00:00
|
|
|
Self::from_bits_truncate(msaa_bits)
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-25 00:23:14 +00:00
|
|
|
#[inline]
|
|
|
|
pub const fn msaa_samples(&self) -> u32 {
|
2022-08-30 03:00:39 +00:00
|
|
|
1 << ((self.bits >> Self::MSAA_SHIFT_BITS) & Self::MSAA_MASK_BITS)
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2022-12-25 00:23:14 +00:00
|
|
|
#[inline]
|
|
|
|
pub const fn from_colored(colored: bool) -> Self {
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
if colored {
|
|
|
|
SpritePipelineKey::COLORED
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
SpritePipelineKey::NONE
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-25 00:23:14 +00:00
|
|
|
#[inline]
|
|
|
|
pub const fn from_hdr(hdr: bool) -> Self {
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
if hdr {
|
|
|
|
SpritePipelineKey::HDR
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
SpritePipelineKey::NONE
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-23 00:27:26 +00:00
|
|
|
impl SpecializedRenderPipeline for SpritePipeline {
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
type Key = SpritePipelineKey;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fn specialize(&self, key: Self::Key) -> RenderPipelineDescriptor {
|
Mesh vertex buffer layouts (#3959)
This PR makes a number of changes to how meshes and vertex attributes are handled, which the goal of enabling easy and flexible custom vertex attributes:
* Reworks the `Mesh` type to use the newly added `VertexAttribute` internally
* `VertexAttribute` defines the name, a unique `VertexAttributeId`, and a `VertexFormat`
* `VertexAttributeId` is used to produce consistent sort orders for vertex buffer generation, replacing the more expensive and often surprising "name based sorting"
* Meshes can be used to generate a `MeshVertexBufferLayout`, which defines the layout of the gpu buffer produced by the mesh. `MeshVertexBufferLayouts` can then be used to generate actual `VertexBufferLayouts` according to the requirements of a specific pipeline. This decoupling of "mesh layout" vs "pipeline vertex buffer layout" is what enables custom attributes. We don't need to standardize _mesh layouts_ or contort meshes to meet the needs of a specific pipeline. As long as the mesh has what the pipeline needs, it will work transparently.
* Mesh-based pipelines now specialize on `&MeshVertexBufferLayout` via the new `SpecializedMeshPipeline` trait (which behaves like `SpecializedPipeline`, but adds `&MeshVertexBufferLayout`). The integrity of the pipeline cache is maintained because the `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is treated as part of the key (which is fully abstracted from implementers of the trait ... no need to add any additional info to the specialization key).
* Hashing `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is too expensive to do for every entity, every frame. To make this scalable, I added a generalized "pre-hashing" solution to `bevy_utils`: `Hashed<T>` keys and `PreHashMap<K, V>` (which uses `Hashed<T>` internally) . Why didn't I just do the quick and dirty in-place "pre-compute hash and use that u64 as a key in a hashmap" that we've done in the past? Because its wrong! Hashes by themselves aren't enough because two different values can produce the same hash. Re-hashing a hash is even worse! I decided to build a generalized solution because this pattern has come up in the past and we've chosen to do the wrong thing. Now we can do the right thing! This did unfortunately require pulling in `hashbrown` and using that in `bevy_utils`, because avoiding re-hashes requires the `raw_entry_mut` api, which isn't stabilized yet (and may never be ... `entry_ref` has favor now, but also isn't available yet). If std's HashMap ever provides the tools we need, we can move back to that. Note that adding `hashbrown` doesn't increase our dependency count because it was already in our tree. I will probably break these changes out into their own PR.
* Specializing on `MeshVertexBufferLayout` has one non-obvious behavior: it can produce identical pipelines for two different MeshVertexBufferLayouts. To optimize the number of active pipelines / reduce re-binds while drawing, I de-duplicate pipelines post-specialization using the final `VertexBufferLayout` as the key. For example, consider a pipeline that needs the layout `(position, normal)` and is specialized using two meshes: `(position, normal, uv)` and `(position, normal, other_vec2)`. If both of these meshes result in `(position, normal)` specializations, we can use the same pipeline! Now we do. Cool!
To briefly illustrate, this is what the relevant section of `MeshPipeline`'s specialization code looks like now:
```rust
impl SpecializedMeshPipeline for MeshPipeline {
type Key = MeshPipelineKey;
fn specialize(
&self,
key: Self::Key,
layout: &MeshVertexBufferLayout,
) -> RenderPipelineDescriptor {
let mut vertex_attributes = vec![
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_POSITION.at_shader_location(0),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL.at_shader_location(1),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_UV_0.at_shader_location(2),
];
let mut shader_defs = Vec::new();
if layout.contains(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT) {
shader_defs.push(String::from("VERTEX_TANGENTS"));
vertex_attributes.push(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT.at_shader_location(3));
}
let vertex_buffer_layout = layout
.get_layout(&vertex_attributes)
.expect("Mesh is missing a vertex attribute");
```
Notice that this is _much_ simpler than it was before. And now any mesh with any layout can be used with this pipeline, provided it has vertex postions, normals, and uvs. We even got to remove `HAS_TANGENTS` from MeshPipelineKey and `has_tangents` from `GpuMesh`, because that information is redundant with `MeshVertexBufferLayout`.
This is still a draft because I still need to:
* Add more docs
* Experiment with adding error handling to mesh pipeline specialization (which would print errors at runtime when a mesh is missing a vertex attribute required by a pipeline). If it doesn't tank perf, we'll keep it.
* Consider breaking out the PreHash / hashbrown changes into a separate PR.
* Add an example illustrating this change
* Verify that the "mesh-specialized pipeline de-duplication code" works properly
Please dont yell at me for not doing these things yet :) Just trying to get this in peoples' hands asap.
Alternative to #3120
Fixes #3030
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-02-23 23:21:13 +00:00
|
|
|
let mut formats = vec![
|
|
|
|
// position
|
|
|
|
VertexFormat::Float32x3,
|
|
|
|
// uv
|
|
|
|
VertexFormat::Float32x2,
|
|
|
|
];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if key.contains(SpritePipelineKey::COLORED) {
|
|
|
|
// color
|
2022-03-30 19:38:24 +00:00
|
|
|
formats.push(VertexFormat::Float32x4);
|
Mesh vertex buffer layouts (#3959)
This PR makes a number of changes to how meshes and vertex attributes are handled, which the goal of enabling easy and flexible custom vertex attributes:
* Reworks the `Mesh` type to use the newly added `VertexAttribute` internally
* `VertexAttribute` defines the name, a unique `VertexAttributeId`, and a `VertexFormat`
* `VertexAttributeId` is used to produce consistent sort orders for vertex buffer generation, replacing the more expensive and often surprising "name based sorting"
* Meshes can be used to generate a `MeshVertexBufferLayout`, which defines the layout of the gpu buffer produced by the mesh. `MeshVertexBufferLayouts` can then be used to generate actual `VertexBufferLayouts` according to the requirements of a specific pipeline. This decoupling of "mesh layout" vs "pipeline vertex buffer layout" is what enables custom attributes. We don't need to standardize _mesh layouts_ or contort meshes to meet the needs of a specific pipeline. As long as the mesh has what the pipeline needs, it will work transparently.
* Mesh-based pipelines now specialize on `&MeshVertexBufferLayout` via the new `SpecializedMeshPipeline` trait (which behaves like `SpecializedPipeline`, but adds `&MeshVertexBufferLayout`). The integrity of the pipeline cache is maintained because the `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is treated as part of the key (which is fully abstracted from implementers of the trait ... no need to add any additional info to the specialization key).
* Hashing `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is too expensive to do for every entity, every frame. To make this scalable, I added a generalized "pre-hashing" solution to `bevy_utils`: `Hashed<T>` keys and `PreHashMap<K, V>` (which uses `Hashed<T>` internally) . Why didn't I just do the quick and dirty in-place "pre-compute hash and use that u64 as a key in a hashmap" that we've done in the past? Because its wrong! Hashes by themselves aren't enough because two different values can produce the same hash. Re-hashing a hash is even worse! I decided to build a generalized solution because this pattern has come up in the past and we've chosen to do the wrong thing. Now we can do the right thing! This did unfortunately require pulling in `hashbrown` and using that in `bevy_utils`, because avoiding re-hashes requires the `raw_entry_mut` api, which isn't stabilized yet (and may never be ... `entry_ref` has favor now, but also isn't available yet). If std's HashMap ever provides the tools we need, we can move back to that. Note that adding `hashbrown` doesn't increase our dependency count because it was already in our tree. I will probably break these changes out into their own PR.
* Specializing on `MeshVertexBufferLayout` has one non-obvious behavior: it can produce identical pipelines for two different MeshVertexBufferLayouts. To optimize the number of active pipelines / reduce re-binds while drawing, I de-duplicate pipelines post-specialization using the final `VertexBufferLayout` as the key. For example, consider a pipeline that needs the layout `(position, normal)` and is specialized using two meshes: `(position, normal, uv)` and `(position, normal, other_vec2)`. If both of these meshes result in `(position, normal)` specializations, we can use the same pipeline! Now we do. Cool!
To briefly illustrate, this is what the relevant section of `MeshPipeline`'s specialization code looks like now:
```rust
impl SpecializedMeshPipeline for MeshPipeline {
type Key = MeshPipelineKey;
fn specialize(
&self,
key: Self::Key,
layout: &MeshVertexBufferLayout,
) -> RenderPipelineDescriptor {
let mut vertex_attributes = vec![
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_POSITION.at_shader_location(0),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL.at_shader_location(1),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_UV_0.at_shader_location(2),
];
let mut shader_defs = Vec::new();
if layout.contains(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT) {
shader_defs.push(String::from("VERTEX_TANGENTS"));
vertex_attributes.push(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT.at_shader_location(3));
}
let vertex_buffer_layout = layout
.get_layout(&vertex_attributes)
.expect("Mesh is missing a vertex attribute");
```
Notice that this is _much_ simpler than it was before. And now any mesh with any layout can be used with this pipeline, provided it has vertex postions, normals, and uvs. We even got to remove `HAS_TANGENTS` from MeshPipelineKey and `has_tangents` from `GpuMesh`, because that information is redundant with `MeshVertexBufferLayout`.
This is still a draft because I still need to:
* Add more docs
* Experiment with adding error handling to mesh pipeline specialization (which would print errors at runtime when a mesh is missing a vertex attribute required by a pipeline). If it doesn't tank perf, we'll keep it.
* Consider breaking out the PreHash / hashbrown changes into a separate PR.
* Add an example illustrating this change
* Verify that the "mesh-specialized pipeline de-duplication code" works properly
Please dont yell at me for not doing these things yet :) Just trying to get this in peoples' hands asap.
Alternative to #3120
Fixes #3030
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-02-23 23:21:13 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let vertex_layout =
|
|
|
|
VertexBufferLayout::from_vertex_formats(VertexStepMode::Vertex, formats);
|
|
|
|
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
let mut shader_defs = Vec::new();
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
if key.contains(SpritePipelineKey::COLORED) {
|
2022-11-21 22:38:29 +00:00
|
|
|
shader_defs.push("COLORED".into());
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
if key.contains(SpritePipelineKey::TONEMAP_IN_SHADER) {
|
2022-11-21 22:38:29 +00:00
|
|
|
shader_defs.push("TONEMAP_IN_SHADER".into());
|
Fix color banding by dithering image before quantization (#5264)
# Objective
- Closes #5262
- Fix color banding caused by quantization.
## Solution
- Adds dithering to the tonemapping node from #3425.
- This is inspired by Godot's default "debanding" shader: https://gist.github.com/belzecue/
- Unlike Godot:
- debanding happens after tonemapping. My understanding is that this is preferred, because we are running the debanding at the last moment before quantization (`[f32, f32, f32, f32]` -> `f32`). This ensures we aren't biasing the dithering strength by applying it in a different (linear) color space.
- This code instead uses and reference the origin source, Valve at GDC 2015
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-44-46](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218880-70f4cdab-a1ed-44de-a88c-8759e77197f1.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-41-11](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218883-72393352-b162-41da-88bb-6e54a1e26853.png)
## Additional Notes
Real time rendering to standard dynamic range outputs is limited to 8 bits of depth per color channel. Internally we keep everything in full 32-bit precision (`vec4<f32>`) inside passes and 16-bit between passes until the image is ready to be displayed, at which point the GPU implicitly converts our `vec4<f32>` into a single 32bit value per pixel, with each channel (rgba) getting 8 of those 32 bits.
### The Problem
8 bits of color depth is simply not enough precision to make each step invisible - we only have 256 values per channel! Human vision can perceive steps in luma to about 14 bits of precision. When drawing a very slight gradient, the transition between steps become visible because with a gradient, neighboring pixels will all jump to the next "step" of precision at the same time.
### The Solution
One solution is to simply output in HDR - more bits of color data means the transition between bands will become smaller. However, not everyone has hardware that supports 10+ bit color depth. Additionally, 10 bit color doesn't even fully solve the issue, banding will result in coherent bands on shallow gradients, but the steps will be harder to perceive.
The solution in this PR adds noise to the signal before it is "quantized" or resampled from 32 to 8 bits. Done naively, it's easy to add unneeded noise to the image. To ensure dithering is correct and absolutely minimal, noise is adding *within* one step of the output color depth. When converting from the 32bit to 8bit signal, the value is rounded to the nearest 8 bit value (0 - 255). Banding occurs around the transition from one value to the next, let's say from 50-51. Dithering will never add more than +/-0.5 bits of noise, so the pixels near this transition might round to 50 instead of 51 but will never round more than one step. This means that the output image won't have excess variance:
- in a gradient from 49 to 51, there will be a step between each band at 49, 50, and 51.
- Done correctly, the modified image of this gradient will never have a adjacent pixels more than one step (0-255) from each other.
- I.e. when scanning across the gradient you should expect to see:
```
|-band-| |-band-| |-band-|
Baseline: 49 49 49 50 50 50 51 51 51
Dithered: 49 50 49 50 50 51 50 51 51
Dithered (wrong): 49 50 51 49 50 51 49 51 50
```
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-12-36](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219075-ab3f46be-d4e9-4869-b66b-a92e1706f49e.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-11-48](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219079-ec5d2add-817d-487a-8fc1-84569c9cda73.png)
You can see from above how correct dithering "fuzzes" the transition between bands to reduce distinct steps in color, without adding excess noise.
### HDR
The previous section (and this PR) assumes the final output is to an 8-bit texture, however this is not always the case. When Bevy adds HDR support, the dithering code will need to take the per-channel depth into account instead of assuming it to be 0-255. Edit: I talked with Rob about this and it seems like the current solution is okay. We may need to revisit once we have actual HDR final image output.
---
## Changelog
### Added
- All pipelines now support deband dithering. This is enabled by default in 3D, and can be toggled in the `Tonemapping` component in camera bundles. Banding is a graphical artifact created when the rendered image is crunched from high precision (f32 per color channel) down to the final output (u8 per channel in SDR). This results in subtle gradients becoming blocky due to the reduced color precision. Deband dithering applies a small amount of noise to the signal before it is "crunched", which breaks up the hard edges of blocks (bands) of color. Note that this does not add excess noise to the image, as the amount of noise is less than a single step of a color channel - just enough to break up the transition between color blocks in a gradient.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-11-11 19:43:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Debanding is tied to tonemapping in the shader, cannot run without it.
|
|
|
|
if key.contains(SpritePipelineKey::DEBAND_DITHER) {
|
2022-11-21 22:38:29 +00:00
|
|
|
shader_defs.push("DEBAND_DITHER".into());
|
Fix color banding by dithering image before quantization (#5264)
# Objective
- Closes #5262
- Fix color banding caused by quantization.
## Solution
- Adds dithering to the tonemapping node from #3425.
- This is inspired by Godot's default "debanding" shader: https://gist.github.com/belzecue/
- Unlike Godot:
- debanding happens after tonemapping. My understanding is that this is preferred, because we are running the debanding at the last moment before quantization (`[f32, f32, f32, f32]` -> `f32`). This ensures we aren't biasing the dithering strength by applying it in a different (linear) color space.
- This code instead uses and reference the origin source, Valve at GDC 2015
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-44-46](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218880-70f4cdab-a1ed-44de-a88c-8759e77197f1.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-41-11](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218883-72393352-b162-41da-88bb-6e54a1e26853.png)
## Additional Notes
Real time rendering to standard dynamic range outputs is limited to 8 bits of depth per color channel. Internally we keep everything in full 32-bit precision (`vec4<f32>`) inside passes and 16-bit between passes until the image is ready to be displayed, at which point the GPU implicitly converts our `vec4<f32>` into a single 32bit value per pixel, with each channel (rgba) getting 8 of those 32 bits.
### The Problem
8 bits of color depth is simply not enough precision to make each step invisible - we only have 256 values per channel! Human vision can perceive steps in luma to about 14 bits of precision. When drawing a very slight gradient, the transition between steps become visible because with a gradient, neighboring pixels will all jump to the next "step" of precision at the same time.
### The Solution
One solution is to simply output in HDR - more bits of color data means the transition between bands will become smaller. However, not everyone has hardware that supports 10+ bit color depth. Additionally, 10 bit color doesn't even fully solve the issue, banding will result in coherent bands on shallow gradients, but the steps will be harder to perceive.
The solution in this PR adds noise to the signal before it is "quantized" or resampled from 32 to 8 bits. Done naively, it's easy to add unneeded noise to the image. To ensure dithering is correct and absolutely minimal, noise is adding *within* one step of the output color depth. When converting from the 32bit to 8bit signal, the value is rounded to the nearest 8 bit value (0 - 255). Banding occurs around the transition from one value to the next, let's say from 50-51. Dithering will never add more than +/-0.5 bits of noise, so the pixels near this transition might round to 50 instead of 51 but will never round more than one step. This means that the output image won't have excess variance:
- in a gradient from 49 to 51, there will be a step between each band at 49, 50, and 51.
- Done correctly, the modified image of this gradient will never have a adjacent pixels more than one step (0-255) from each other.
- I.e. when scanning across the gradient you should expect to see:
```
|-band-| |-band-| |-band-|
Baseline: 49 49 49 50 50 50 51 51 51
Dithered: 49 50 49 50 50 51 50 51 51
Dithered (wrong): 49 50 51 49 50 51 49 51 50
```
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-12-36](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219075-ab3f46be-d4e9-4869-b66b-a92e1706f49e.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-11-48](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219079-ec5d2add-817d-487a-8fc1-84569c9cda73.png)
You can see from above how correct dithering "fuzzes" the transition between bands to reduce distinct steps in color, without adding excess noise.
### HDR
The previous section (and this PR) assumes the final output is to an 8-bit texture, however this is not always the case. When Bevy adds HDR support, the dithering code will need to take the per-channel depth into account instead of assuming it to be 0-255. Edit: I talked with Rob about this and it seems like the current solution is okay. We may need to revisit once we have actual HDR final image output.
---
## Changelog
### Added
- All pipelines now support deband dithering. This is enabled by default in 3D, and can be toggled in the `Tonemapping` component in camera bundles. Banding is a graphical artifact created when the rendered image is crunched from high precision (f32 per color channel) down to the final output (u8 per channel in SDR). This results in subtle gradients becoming blocky due to the reduced color precision. Deband dithering applies a small amount of noise to the signal before it is "crunched", which breaks up the hard edges of blocks (bands) of color. Note that this does not add excess noise to the image, as the amount of noise is less than a single step of a color channel - just enough to break up the transition between color blocks in a gradient.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-11-11 19:43:45 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let format = match key.contains(SpritePipelineKey::HDR) {
|
|
|
|
true => ViewTarget::TEXTURE_FORMAT_HDR,
|
|
|
|
false => TextureFormat::bevy_default(),
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
RenderPipelineDescriptor {
|
|
|
|
vertex: VertexState {
|
|
|
|
shader: SPRITE_SHADER_HANDLE.typed::<Shader>(),
|
|
|
|
entry_point: "vertex".into(),
|
|
|
|
shader_defs: shader_defs.clone(),
|
Mesh vertex buffer layouts (#3959)
This PR makes a number of changes to how meshes and vertex attributes are handled, which the goal of enabling easy and flexible custom vertex attributes:
* Reworks the `Mesh` type to use the newly added `VertexAttribute` internally
* `VertexAttribute` defines the name, a unique `VertexAttributeId`, and a `VertexFormat`
* `VertexAttributeId` is used to produce consistent sort orders for vertex buffer generation, replacing the more expensive and often surprising "name based sorting"
* Meshes can be used to generate a `MeshVertexBufferLayout`, which defines the layout of the gpu buffer produced by the mesh. `MeshVertexBufferLayouts` can then be used to generate actual `VertexBufferLayouts` according to the requirements of a specific pipeline. This decoupling of "mesh layout" vs "pipeline vertex buffer layout" is what enables custom attributes. We don't need to standardize _mesh layouts_ or contort meshes to meet the needs of a specific pipeline. As long as the mesh has what the pipeline needs, it will work transparently.
* Mesh-based pipelines now specialize on `&MeshVertexBufferLayout` via the new `SpecializedMeshPipeline` trait (which behaves like `SpecializedPipeline`, but adds `&MeshVertexBufferLayout`). The integrity of the pipeline cache is maintained because the `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is treated as part of the key (which is fully abstracted from implementers of the trait ... no need to add any additional info to the specialization key).
* Hashing `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is too expensive to do for every entity, every frame. To make this scalable, I added a generalized "pre-hashing" solution to `bevy_utils`: `Hashed<T>` keys and `PreHashMap<K, V>` (which uses `Hashed<T>` internally) . Why didn't I just do the quick and dirty in-place "pre-compute hash and use that u64 as a key in a hashmap" that we've done in the past? Because its wrong! Hashes by themselves aren't enough because two different values can produce the same hash. Re-hashing a hash is even worse! I decided to build a generalized solution because this pattern has come up in the past and we've chosen to do the wrong thing. Now we can do the right thing! This did unfortunately require pulling in `hashbrown` and using that in `bevy_utils`, because avoiding re-hashes requires the `raw_entry_mut` api, which isn't stabilized yet (and may never be ... `entry_ref` has favor now, but also isn't available yet). If std's HashMap ever provides the tools we need, we can move back to that. Note that adding `hashbrown` doesn't increase our dependency count because it was already in our tree. I will probably break these changes out into their own PR.
* Specializing on `MeshVertexBufferLayout` has one non-obvious behavior: it can produce identical pipelines for two different MeshVertexBufferLayouts. To optimize the number of active pipelines / reduce re-binds while drawing, I de-duplicate pipelines post-specialization using the final `VertexBufferLayout` as the key. For example, consider a pipeline that needs the layout `(position, normal)` and is specialized using two meshes: `(position, normal, uv)` and `(position, normal, other_vec2)`. If both of these meshes result in `(position, normal)` specializations, we can use the same pipeline! Now we do. Cool!
To briefly illustrate, this is what the relevant section of `MeshPipeline`'s specialization code looks like now:
```rust
impl SpecializedMeshPipeline for MeshPipeline {
type Key = MeshPipelineKey;
fn specialize(
&self,
key: Self::Key,
layout: &MeshVertexBufferLayout,
) -> RenderPipelineDescriptor {
let mut vertex_attributes = vec![
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_POSITION.at_shader_location(0),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL.at_shader_location(1),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_UV_0.at_shader_location(2),
];
let mut shader_defs = Vec::new();
if layout.contains(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT) {
shader_defs.push(String::from("VERTEX_TANGENTS"));
vertex_attributes.push(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT.at_shader_location(3));
}
let vertex_buffer_layout = layout
.get_layout(&vertex_attributes)
.expect("Mesh is missing a vertex attribute");
```
Notice that this is _much_ simpler than it was before. And now any mesh with any layout can be used with this pipeline, provided it has vertex postions, normals, and uvs. We even got to remove `HAS_TANGENTS` from MeshPipelineKey and `has_tangents` from `GpuMesh`, because that information is redundant with `MeshVertexBufferLayout`.
This is still a draft because I still need to:
* Add more docs
* Experiment with adding error handling to mesh pipeline specialization (which would print errors at runtime when a mesh is missing a vertex attribute required by a pipeline). If it doesn't tank perf, we'll keep it.
* Consider breaking out the PreHash / hashbrown changes into a separate PR.
* Add an example illustrating this change
* Verify that the "mesh-specialized pipeline de-duplication code" works properly
Please dont yell at me for not doing these things yet :) Just trying to get this in peoples' hands asap.
Alternative to #3120
Fixes #3030
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-02-23 23:21:13 +00:00
|
|
|
buffers: vec![vertex_layout],
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
fragment: Some(FragmentState {
|
|
|
|
shader: SPRITE_SHADER_HANDLE.typed::<Shader>(),
|
|
|
|
shader_defs,
|
|
|
|
entry_point: "fragment".into(),
|
2022-07-14 21:17:16 +00:00
|
|
|
targets: vec![Some(ColorTargetState {
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
format,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
blend: Some(BlendState::ALPHA_BLENDING),
|
|
|
|
write_mask: ColorWrites::ALL,
|
2022-07-14 21:17:16 +00:00
|
|
|
})],
|
2021-05-02 20:45:25 +00:00
|
|
|
}),
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
layout: Some(vec![self.view_layout.clone(), self.material_layout.clone()]),
|
|
|
|
primitive: PrimitiveState {
|
|
|
|
front_face: FrontFace::Ccw,
|
|
|
|
cull_mode: None,
|
2021-12-19 03:03:06 +00:00
|
|
|
unclipped_depth: false,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
polygon_mode: PolygonMode::Fill,
|
|
|
|
conservative: false,
|
|
|
|
topology: PrimitiveTopology::TriangleList,
|
|
|
|
strip_index_format: None,
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
depth_stencil: None,
|
|
|
|
multisample: MultisampleState {
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
count: key.msaa_samples(),
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
mask: !0,
|
|
|
|
alpha_to_coverage_enabled: false,
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
label: Some("sprite_pipeline".into()),
|
|
|
|
}
|
2020-05-30 19:31:04 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
#[derive(Component, Clone, Copy)]
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct ExtractedSprite {
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
pub entity: Entity,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pub transform: GlobalTransform,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub color: Color,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
/// Select an area of the texture
|
|
|
|
pub rect: Option<Rect>,
|
|
|
|
/// Change the on-screen size of the sprite
|
|
|
|
pub custom_size: Option<Vec2>,
|
|
|
|
/// Handle to the `Image` of this sprite
|
|
|
|
/// PERF: storing a `HandleId` instead of `Handle<Image>` enables some optimizations (`ExtractedSprite` becomes `Copy` and doesn't need to be dropped)
|
|
|
|
pub image_handle_id: HandleId,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub flip_x: bool,
|
|
|
|
pub flip_y: bool,
|
2022-04-04 22:09:59 +00:00
|
|
|
pub anchor: Vec2,
|
2020-05-30 19:31:04 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Make `Resource` trait opt-in, requiring `#[derive(Resource)]` V2 (#5577)
*This PR description is an edited copy of #5007, written by @alice-i-cecile.*
# Objective
Follow-up to https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/2254. The `Resource` trait currently has a blanket implementation for all types that meet its bounds.
While ergonomic, this results in several drawbacks:
* it is possible to make confusing, silent mistakes such as inserting a function pointer (Foo) rather than a value (Foo::Bar) as a resource
* it is challenging to discover if a type is intended to be used as a resource
* we cannot later add customization options (see the [RFC](https://github.com/bevyengine/rfcs/blob/main/rfcs/27-derive-component.md) for the equivalent choice for Component).
* dependencies can use the same Rust type as a resource in invisibly conflicting ways
* raw Rust types used as resources cannot preserve privacy appropriately, as anyone able to access that type can read and write to internal values
* we cannot capture a definitive list of possible resources to display to users in an editor
## Notes to reviewers
* Review this commit-by-commit; there's effectively no back-tracking and there's a lot of churn in some of these commits.
*ira: My commits are not as well organized :')*
* I've relaxed the bound on Local to Send + Sync + 'static: I don't think these concerns apply there, so this can keep things simple. Storing e.g. a u32 in a Local is fine, because there's a variable name attached explaining what it does.
* I think this is a bad place for the Resource trait to live, but I've left it in place to make reviewing easier. IMO that's best tackled with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/4981.
## Changelog
`Resource` is no longer automatically implemented for all matching types. Instead, use the new `#[derive(Resource)]` macro.
## Migration Guide
Add `#[derive(Resource)]` to all types you are using as a resource.
If you are using a third party type as a resource, wrap it in a tuple struct to bypass orphan rules. Consider deriving `Deref` and `DerefMut` to improve ergonomics.
`ClearColor` no longer implements `Component`. Using `ClearColor` as a component in 0.8 did nothing.
Use the `ClearColorConfig` in the `Camera3d` and `Camera2d` components instead.
Co-authored-by: Alice <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: devil-ira <justthecooldude@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-08-08 21:36:35 +00:00
|
|
|
#[derive(Resource, Default)]
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct ExtractedSprites {
|
|
|
|
pub sprites: Vec<ExtractedSprite>,
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Make `Resource` trait opt-in, requiring `#[derive(Resource)]` V2 (#5577)
*This PR description is an edited copy of #5007, written by @alice-i-cecile.*
# Objective
Follow-up to https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/2254. The `Resource` trait currently has a blanket implementation for all types that meet its bounds.
While ergonomic, this results in several drawbacks:
* it is possible to make confusing, silent mistakes such as inserting a function pointer (Foo) rather than a value (Foo::Bar) as a resource
* it is challenging to discover if a type is intended to be used as a resource
* we cannot later add customization options (see the [RFC](https://github.com/bevyengine/rfcs/blob/main/rfcs/27-derive-component.md) for the equivalent choice for Component).
* dependencies can use the same Rust type as a resource in invisibly conflicting ways
* raw Rust types used as resources cannot preserve privacy appropriately, as anyone able to access that type can read and write to internal values
* we cannot capture a definitive list of possible resources to display to users in an editor
## Notes to reviewers
* Review this commit-by-commit; there's effectively no back-tracking and there's a lot of churn in some of these commits.
*ira: My commits are not as well organized :')*
* I've relaxed the bound on Local to Send + Sync + 'static: I don't think these concerns apply there, so this can keep things simple. Storing e.g. a u32 in a Local is fine, because there's a variable name attached explaining what it does.
* I think this is a bad place for the Resource trait to live, but I've left it in place to make reviewing easier. IMO that's best tackled with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/4981.
## Changelog
`Resource` is no longer automatically implemented for all matching types. Instead, use the new `#[derive(Resource)]` macro.
## Migration Guide
Add `#[derive(Resource)]` to all types you are using as a resource.
If you are using a third party type as a resource, wrap it in a tuple struct to bypass orphan rules. Consider deriving `Deref` and `DerefMut` to improve ergonomics.
`ClearColor` no longer implements `Component`. Using `ClearColor` as a component in 0.8 did nothing.
Use the `ClearColorConfig` in the `Camera3d` and `Camera2d` components instead.
Co-authored-by: Alice <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: devil-ira <justthecooldude@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-08-08 21:36:35 +00:00
|
|
|
#[derive(Resource, Default)]
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct SpriteAssetEvents {
|
|
|
|
pub images: Vec<AssetEvent<Image>>,
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pub fn extract_sprite_events(
|
Make `RenderStage::Extract` run on the render world (#4402)
# Objective
- Currently, the `Extract` `RenderStage` is executed on the main world, with the render world available as a resource.
- However, when needing access to resources in the render world (e.g. to mutate them), the only way to do so was to get exclusive access to the whole `RenderWorld` resource.
- This meant that effectively only one extract which wrote to resources could run at a time.
- We didn't previously make `Extract`ing writing to the world a non-happy path, even though we want to discourage that.
## Solution
- Move the extract stage to run on the render world.
- Add the main world as a `MainWorld` resource.
- Add an `Extract` `SystemParam` as a convenience to access a (read only) `SystemParam` in the main world during `Extract`.
## Future work
It should be possible to avoid needing to use `get_or_spawn` for the render commands, since now the `Commands`' `Entities` matches up with the world being executed on.
We need to determine how this interacts with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3519
It's theoretically possible to remove the need for the `value` method on `Extract`. However, that requires slightly changing the `SystemParam` interface, which would make it more complicated. That would probably mess up the `SystemState` api too.
## Todo
I still need to add doc comments to `Extract`.
---
## Changelog
### Changed
- The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase.
Resources on the render world can now be accessed using `ResMut` during extract.
### Removed
- `Commands::spawn_and_forget`. Use `Commands::get_or_spawn(e).insert_bundle(bundle)` instead
## Migration Guide
The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase. `Extract` takes a single type parameter, which is any system parameter (such as `Res`, `Query` etc.). It will extract this from the main world, and returns the result of this extraction when `value` is called on it.
For example, if previously your extract system looked like:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
for cloud in clouds.iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
the new version would be:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
The diff is:
```diff
--- a/src/clouds.rs
+++ b/src/clouds.rs
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
- for cloud in clouds.iter() {
+fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
+ for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
You can now also access resources from the render world using the normal system parameters during `Extract`:
```rust
fn extract_assets(mut render_assets: ResMut<MyAssets>, source_assets: Extract<Res<MyAssets>>) {
*render_assets = source_assets.clone();
}
```
Please note that all existing extract systems need to be updated to match this new style; even if they currently compile they will not run as expected. A warning will be emitted on a best-effort basis if this is not met.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-08 23:56:33 +00:00
|
|
|
mut events: ResMut<SpriteAssetEvents>,
|
|
|
|
mut image_events: Extract<EventReader<AssetEvent<Image>>>,
|
Bevy ECS V2 (#1525)
# Bevy ECS V2
This is a rewrite of Bevy ECS (basically everything but the new executor/schedule, which are already awesome). The overall goal was to improve the performance and versatility of Bevy ECS. Here is a quick bulleted list of changes before we dive into the details:
* Complete World rewrite
* Multiple component storage types:
* Tables: fast cache friendly iteration, slower add/removes (previously called Archetypes)
* Sparse Sets: fast add/remove, slower iteration
* Stateful Queries (caches query results for faster iteration. fragmented iteration is _fast_ now)
* Stateful System Params (caches expensive operations. inspired by @DJMcNab's work in #1364)
* Configurable System Params (users can set configuration when they construct their systems. once again inspired by @DJMcNab's work)
* Archetypes are now "just metadata", component storage is separate
* Archetype Graph (for faster archetype changes)
* Component Metadata
* Configure component storage type
* Retrieve information about component size/type/name/layout/send-ness/etc
* Components are uniquely identified by a densely packed ComponentId
* TypeIds are now totally optional (which should make implementing scripting easier)
* Super fast "for_each" query iterators
* Merged Resources into World. Resources are now just a special type of component
* EntityRef/EntityMut builder apis (more efficient and more ergonomic)
* Fast bitset-backed `Access<T>` replaces old hashmap-based approach everywhere
* Query conflicts are determined by component access instead of archetype component access (to avoid random failures at runtime)
* With/Without are still taken into account for conflicts, so this should still be comfy to use
* Much simpler `IntoSystem` impl
* Significantly reduced the amount of hashing throughout the ecs in favor of Sparse Sets (indexed by densely packed ArchetypeId, ComponentId, BundleId, and TableId)
* Safety Improvements
* Entity reservation uses a normal world reference instead of unsafe transmute
* QuerySets no longer transmute lifetimes
* Made traits "unsafe" where relevant
* More thorough safety docs
* WorldCell
* Exposes safe mutable access to multiple resources at a time in a World
* Replaced "catch all" `System::update_archetypes(world: &World)` with `System::new_archetype(archetype: &Archetype)`
* Simpler Bundle implementation
* Replaced slow "remove_bundle_one_by_one" used as fallback for Commands::remove_bundle with fast "remove_bundle_intersection"
* Removed `Mut<T>` query impl. it is better to only support one way: `&mut T`
* Removed with() from `Flags<T>` in favor of `Option<Flags<T>>`, which allows querying for flags to be "filtered" by default
* Components now have is_send property (currently only resources support non-send)
* More granular module organization
* New `RemovedComponents<T>` SystemParam that replaces `query.removed::<T>()`
* `world.resource_scope()` for mutable access to resources and world at the same time
* WorldQuery and QueryFilter traits unified. FilterFetch trait added to enable "short circuit" filtering. Auto impled for cases that don't need it
* Significantly slimmed down SystemState in favor of individual SystemParam state
* System Commands changed from `commands: &mut Commands` back to `mut commands: Commands` (to allow Commands to have a World reference)
Fixes #1320
## `World` Rewrite
This is a from-scratch rewrite of `World` that fills the niche that `hecs` used to. Yes, this means Bevy ECS is no longer a "fork" of hecs. We're going out our own!
(the only shared code between the projects is the entity id allocator, which is already basically ideal)
A huge shout out to @SanderMertens (author of [flecs](https://github.com/SanderMertens/flecs)) for sharing some great ideas with me (specifically hybrid ecs storage and archetype graphs). He also helped advise on a number of implementation details.
## Component Storage (The Problem)
Two ECS storage paradigms have gained a lot of traction over the years:
* **Archetypal ECS**:
* Stores components in "tables" with static schemas. Each "column" stores components of a given type. Each "row" is an entity.
* Each "archetype" has its own table. Adding/removing an entity's component changes the archetype.
* Enables super-fast Query iteration due to its cache-friendly data layout
* Comes at the cost of more expensive add/remove operations for an Entity's components, because all components need to be copied to the new archetype's "table"
* **Sparse Set ECS**:
* Stores components of the same type in densely packed arrays, which are sparsely indexed by densely packed unsigned integers (Entity ids)
* Query iteration is slower than Archetypal ECS because each entity's component could be at any position in the sparse set. This "random access" pattern isn't cache friendly. Additionally, there is an extra layer of indirection because you must first map the entity id to an index in the component array.
* Adding/removing components is a cheap, constant time operation
Bevy ECS V1, hecs, legion, flec, and Unity DOTS are all "archetypal ecs-es". I personally think "archetypal" storage is a good default for game engines. An entity's archetype doesn't need to change frequently in general, and it creates "fast by default" query iteration (which is a much more common operation). It is also "self optimizing". Users don't need to think about optimizing component layouts for iteration performance. It "just works" without any extra boilerplate.
Shipyard and EnTT are "sparse set ecs-es". They employ "packing" as a way to work around the "suboptimal by default" iteration performance for specific sets of components. This helps, but I didn't think this was a good choice for a general purpose engine like Bevy because:
1. "packs" conflict with each other. If bevy decides to internally pack the Transform and GlobalTransform components, users are then blocked if they want to pack some custom component with Transform.
2. users need to take manual action to optimize
Developers selecting an ECS framework are stuck with a hard choice. Select an "archetypal" framework with "fast iteration everywhere" but without the ability to cheaply add/remove components, or select a "sparse set" framework to cheaply add/remove components but with slower iteration performance.
## Hybrid Component Storage (The Solution)
In Bevy ECS V2, we get to have our cake and eat it too. It now has _both_ of the component storage types above (and more can be added later if needed):
* **Tables** (aka "archetypal" storage)
* The default storage. If you don't configure anything, this is what you get
* Fast iteration by default
* Slower add/remove operations
* **Sparse Sets**
* Opt-in
* Slower iteration
* Faster add/remove operations
These storage types complement each other perfectly. By default Query iteration is fast. If developers know that they want to add/remove a component at high frequencies, they can set the storage to "sparse set":
```rust
world.register_component(
ComponentDescriptor::new::<MyComponent>(StorageType::SparseSet)
).unwrap();
```
## Archetypes
Archetypes are now "just metadata" ... they no longer store components directly. They do store:
* The `ComponentId`s of each of the Archetype's components (and that component's storage type)
* Archetypes are uniquely defined by their component layouts
* For example: entities with "table" components `[A, B, C]` _and_ "sparse set" components `[D, E]` will always be in the same archetype.
* The `TableId` associated with the archetype
* For now each archetype has exactly one table (which can have no components),
* There is a 1->Many relationship from Tables->Archetypes. A given table could have any number of archetype components stored in it:
* Ex: an entity with "table storage" components `[A, B, C]` and "sparse set" components `[D, E]` will share the same `[A, B, C]` table as an entity with `[A, B, C]` table component and `[F]` sparse set components.
* This 1->Many relationship is how we preserve fast "cache friendly" iteration performance when possible (more on this later)
* A list of entities that are in the archetype and the row id of the table they are in
* ArchetypeComponentIds
* unique densely packed identifiers for (ArchetypeId, ComponentId) pairs
* used by the schedule executor for cheap system access control
* "Archetype Graph Edges" (see the next section)
## The "Archetype Graph"
Archetype changes in Bevy (and a number of other archetypal ecs-es) have historically been expensive to compute. First, you need to allocate a new vector of the entity's current component ids, add or remove components based on the operation performed, sort it (to ensure it is order-independent), then hash it to find the archetype (if it exists). And thats all before we get to the _already_ expensive full copy of all components to the new table storage.
The solution is to build a "graph" of archetypes to cache these results. @SanderMertens first exposed me to the idea (and he got it from @gjroelofs, who came up with it). They propose adding directed edges between archetypes for add/remove component operations. If `ComponentId`s are densely packed, you can use sparse sets to cheaply jump between archetypes.
Bevy takes this one step further by using add/remove `Bundle` edges instead of `Component` edges. Bevy encourages the use of `Bundles` to group add/remove operations. This is largely for "clearer game logic" reasons, but it also helps cut down on the number of archetype changes required. `Bundles` now also have densely-packed `BundleId`s. This allows us to use a _single_ edge for each bundle operation (rather than needing to traverse N edges ... one for each component). Single component operations are also bundles, so this is strictly an improvement over a "component only" graph.
As a result, an operation that used to be _heavy_ (both for allocations and compute) is now two dirt-cheap array lookups and zero allocations.
## Stateful Queries
World queries are now stateful. This allows us to:
1. Cache archetype (and table) matches
* This resolves another issue with (naive) archetypal ECS: query performance getting worse as the number of archetypes goes up (and fragmentation occurs).
2. Cache Fetch and Filter state
* The expensive parts of fetch/filter operations (such as hashing the TypeId to find the ComponentId) now only happen once when the Query is first constructed
3. Incrementally build up state
* When new archetypes are added, we only process the new archetypes (no need to rebuild state for old archetypes)
As a result, the direct `World` query api now looks like this:
```rust
let mut query = world.query::<(&A, &mut B)>();
for (a, mut b) in query.iter_mut(&mut world) {
}
```
Requiring `World` to generate stateful queries (rather than letting the `QueryState` type be constructed separately) allows us to ensure that _all_ queries are properly initialized (and the relevant world state, such as ComponentIds). This enables QueryState to remove branches from its operations that check for initialization status (and also enables query.iter() to take an immutable world reference because it doesn't need to initialize anything in world).
However in systems, this is a non-breaking change. State management is done internally by the relevant SystemParam.
## Stateful SystemParams
Like Queries, `SystemParams` now also cache state. For example, `Query` system params store the "stateful query" state mentioned above. Commands store their internal `CommandQueue`. This means you can now safely use as many separate `Commands` parameters in your system as you want. `Local<T>` system params store their `T` value in their state (instead of in Resources).
SystemParam state also enabled a significant slim-down of SystemState. It is much nicer to look at now.
Per-SystemParam state naturally insulates us from an "aliased mut" class of errors we have hit in the past (ex: using multiple `Commands` system params).
(credit goes to @DJMcNab for the initial idea and draft pr here #1364)
## Configurable SystemParams
@DJMcNab also had the great idea to make SystemParams configurable. This allows users to provide some initial configuration / values for system parameters (when possible). Most SystemParams have no config (the config type is `()`), but the `Local<T>` param now supports user-provided parameters:
```rust
fn foo(value: Local<usize>) {
}
app.add_system(foo.system().config(|c| c.0 = Some(10)));
```
## Uber Fast "for_each" Query Iterators
Developers now have the choice to use a fast "for_each" iterator, which yields ~1.5-3x iteration speed improvements for "fragmented iteration", and minor ~1.2x iteration speed improvements for unfragmented iteration.
```rust
fn system(query: Query<(&A, &mut B)>) {
// you now have the option to do this for a speed boost
query.for_each_mut(|(a, mut b)| {
});
// however normal iterators are still available
for (a, mut b) in query.iter_mut() {
}
}
```
I think in most cases we should continue to encourage "normal" iterators as they are more flexible and more "rust idiomatic". But when that extra "oomf" is needed, it makes sense to use `for_each`.
We should also consider using `for_each` for internal bevy systems to give our users a nice speed boost (but that should be a separate pr).
## Component Metadata
`World` now has a `Components` collection, which is accessible via `world.components()`. This stores mappings from `ComponentId` to `ComponentInfo`, as well as `TypeId` to `ComponentId` mappings (where relevant). `ComponentInfo` stores information about the component, such as ComponentId, TypeId, memory layout, send-ness (currently limited to resources), and storage type.
## Significantly Cheaper `Access<T>`
We used to use `TypeAccess<TypeId>` to manage read/write component/archetype-component access. This was expensive because TypeIds must be hashed and compared individually. The parallel executor got around this by "condensing" type ids into bitset-backed access types. This worked, but it had to be re-generated from the `TypeAccess<TypeId>`sources every time archetypes changed.
This pr removes TypeAccess in favor of faster bitset access everywhere. We can do this thanks to the move to densely packed `ComponentId`s and `ArchetypeComponentId`s.
## Merged Resources into World
Resources had a lot of redundant functionality with Components. They stored typed data, they had access control, they had unique ids, they were queryable via SystemParams, etc. In fact the _only_ major difference between them was that they were unique (and didn't correlate to an entity).
Separate resources also had the downside of requiring a separate set of access controls, which meant the parallel executor needed to compare more bitsets per system and manage more state.
I initially got the "separate resources" idea from `legion`. I think that design was motivated by the fact that it made the direct world query/resource lifetime interactions more manageable. It certainly made our lives easier when using Resources alongside hecs/bevy_ecs. However we already have a construct for safely and ergonomically managing in-world lifetimes: systems (which use `Access<T>` internally).
This pr merges Resources into World:
```rust
world.insert_resource(1);
world.insert_resource(2.0);
let a = world.get_resource::<i32>().unwrap();
let mut b = world.get_resource_mut::<f64>().unwrap();
*b = 3.0;
```
Resources are now just a special kind of component. They have their own ComponentIds (and their own resource TypeId->ComponentId scope, so they don't conflict wit components of the same type). They are stored in a special "resource archetype", which stores components inside the archetype using a new `unique_components` sparse set (note that this sparse set could later be used to implement Tags). This allows us to keep the code size small by reusing existing datastructures (namely Column, Archetype, ComponentFlags, and ComponentInfo). This allows us the executor to use a single `Access<ArchetypeComponentId>` per system. It should also make scripting language integration easier.
_But_ this merge did create problems for people directly interacting with `World`. What if you need mutable access to multiple resources at the same time? `world.get_resource_mut()` borrows World mutably!
## WorldCell
WorldCell applies the `Access<ArchetypeComponentId>` concept to direct world access:
```rust
let world_cell = world.cell();
let a = world_cell.get_resource_mut::<i32>().unwrap();
let b = world_cell.get_resource_mut::<f64>().unwrap();
```
This adds cheap runtime checks (a sparse set lookup of `ArchetypeComponentId` and a counter) to ensure that world accesses do not conflict with each other. Each operation returns a `WorldBorrow<'w, T>` or `WorldBorrowMut<'w, T>` wrapper type, which will release the relevant ArchetypeComponentId resources when dropped.
World caches the access sparse set (and only one cell can exist at a time), so `world.cell()` is a cheap operation.
WorldCell does _not_ use atomic operations. It is non-send, does a mutable borrow of world to prevent other accesses, and uses a simple `Rc<RefCell<ArchetypeComponentAccess>>` wrapper in each WorldBorrow pointer.
The api is currently limited to resource access, but it can and should be extended to queries / entity component access.
## Resource Scopes
WorldCell does not yet support component queries, and even when it does there are sometimes legitimate reasons to want a mutable world ref _and_ a mutable resource ref (ex: bevy_render and bevy_scene both need this). In these cases we could always drop down to the unsafe `world.get_resource_unchecked_mut()`, but that is not ideal!
Instead developers can use a "resource scope"
```rust
world.resource_scope(|world: &mut World, a: &mut A| {
})
```
This temporarily removes the `A` resource from `World`, provides mutable pointers to both, and re-adds A to World when finished. Thanks to the move to ComponentIds/sparse sets, this is a cheap operation.
If multiple resources are required, scopes can be nested. We could also consider adding a "resource tuple" to the api if this pattern becomes common and the boilerplate gets nasty.
## Query Conflicts Use ComponentId Instead of ArchetypeComponentId
For safety reasons, systems cannot contain queries that conflict with each other without wrapping them in a QuerySet. On bevy `main`, we use ArchetypeComponentIds to determine conflicts. This is nice because it can take into account filters:
```rust
// these queries will never conflict due to their filters
fn filter_system(a: Query<&mut A, With<B>>, b: Query<&mut B, Without<B>>) {
}
```
But it also has a significant downside:
```rust
// these queries will not conflict _until_ an entity with A, B, and C is spawned
fn maybe_conflicts_system(a: Query<(&mut A, &C)>, b: Query<(&mut A, &B)>) {
}
```
The system above will panic at runtime if an entity with A, B, and C is spawned. This makes it hard to trust that your game logic will run without crashing.
In this pr, I switched to using `ComponentId` instead. This _is_ more constraining. `maybe_conflicts_system` will now always fail, but it will do it consistently at startup. Naively, it would also _disallow_ `filter_system`, which would be a significant downgrade in usability. Bevy has a number of internal systems that rely on disjoint queries and I expect it to be a common pattern in userspace.
To resolve this, I added a new `FilteredAccess<T>` type, which wraps `Access<T>` and adds with/without filters. If two `FilteredAccess` have with/without values that prove they are disjoint, they will no longer conflict.
## EntityRef / EntityMut
World entity operations on `main` require that the user passes in an `entity` id to each operation:
```rust
let entity = world.spawn((A, )); // create a new entity with A
world.get::<A>(entity);
world.insert(entity, (B, C));
world.insert_one(entity, D);
```
This means that each operation needs to look up the entity location / verify its validity. The initial spawn operation also requires a Bundle as input. This can be awkward when no components are required (or one component is required).
These operations have been replaced by `EntityRef` and `EntityMut`, which are "builder-style" wrappers around world that provide read and read/write operations on a single, pre-validated entity:
```rust
// spawn now takes no inputs and returns an EntityMut
let entity = world.spawn()
.insert(A) // insert a single component into the entity
.insert_bundle((B, C)) // insert a bundle of components into the entity
.id() // id returns the Entity id
// Returns EntityMut (or panics if the entity does not exist)
world.entity_mut(entity)
.insert(D)
.insert_bundle(SomeBundle::default());
{
// returns EntityRef (or panics if the entity does not exist)
let d = world.entity(entity)
.get::<D>() // gets the D component
.unwrap();
// world.get still exists for ergonomics
let d = world.get::<D>(entity).unwrap();
}
// These variants return Options if you want to check existence instead of panicing
world.get_entity_mut(entity)
.unwrap()
.insert(E);
if let Some(entity_ref) = world.get_entity(entity) {
let d = entity_ref.get::<D>().unwrap();
}
```
This _does not_ affect the current Commands api or terminology. I think that should be a separate conversation as that is a much larger breaking change.
## Safety Improvements
* Entity reservation in Commands uses a normal world borrow instead of an unsafe transmute
* QuerySets no longer transmutes lifetimes
* Made traits "unsafe" when implementing a trait incorrectly could cause unsafety
* More thorough safety docs
## RemovedComponents SystemParam
The old approach to querying removed components: `query.removed:<T>()` was confusing because it had no connection to the query itself. I replaced it with the following, which is both clearer and allows us to cache the ComponentId mapping in the SystemParamState:
```rust
fn system(removed: RemovedComponents<T>) {
for entity in removed.iter() {
}
}
```
## Simpler Bundle implementation
Bundles are no longer responsible for sorting (or deduping) TypeInfo. They are just a simple ordered list of component types / data. This makes the implementation smaller and opens the door to an easy "nested bundle" implementation in the future (which i might even add in this pr). Duplicate detection is now done once per bundle type by World the first time a bundle is used.
## Unified WorldQuery and QueryFilter types
(don't worry they are still separate type _parameters_ in Queries .. this is a non-breaking change)
WorldQuery and QueryFilter were already basically identical apis. With the addition of `FetchState` and more storage-specific fetch methods, the overlap was even clearer (and the redundancy more painful).
QueryFilters are now just `F: WorldQuery where F::Fetch: FilterFetch`. FilterFetch requires `Fetch<Item = bool>` and adds new "short circuit" variants of fetch methods. This enables a filter tuple like `(With<A>, Without<B>, Changed<C>)` to stop evaluating the filter after the first mismatch is encountered. FilterFetch is automatically implemented for `Fetch` implementations that return bool.
This forces fetch implementations that return things like `(bool, bool, bool)` (such as the filter above) to manually implement FilterFetch and decide whether or not to short-circuit.
## More Granular Modules
World no longer globs all of the internal modules together. It now exports `core`, `system`, and `schedule` separately. I'm also considering exporting `core` submodules directly as that is still pretty "glob-ey" and unorganized (feedback welcome here).
## Remaining Draft Work (to be done in this pr)
* ~~panic on conflicting WorldQuery fetches (&A, &mut A)~~
* ~~bevy `main` and hecs both currently allow this, but we should protect against it if possible~~
* ~~batch_iter / par_iter (currently stubbed out)~~
* ~~ChangedRes~~
* ~~I skipped this while we sort out #1313. This pr should be adapted to account for whatever we land on there~~.
* ~~The `Archetypes` and `Tables` collections use hashes of sorted lists of component ids to uniquely identify each archetype/table. This hash is then used as the key in a HashMap to look up the relevant ArchetypeId or TableId. (which doesn't handle hash collisions properly)~~
* ~~It is currently unsafe to generate a Query from "World A", then use it on "World B" (despite the api claiming it is safe). We should probably close this gap. This could be done by adding a randomly generated WorldId to each world, then storing that id in each Query. They could then be compared to each other on each `query.do_thing(&world)` operation. This _does_ add an extra branch to each query operation, so I'm open to other suggestions if people have them.~~
* ~~Nested Bundles (if i find time)~~
## Potential Future Work
* Expand WorldCell to support queries.
* Consider not allocating in the empty archetype on `world.spawn()`
* ex: return something like EntityMutUninit, which turns into EntityMut after an `insert` or `insert_bundle` op
* this actually regressed performance last time i tried it, but in theory it should be faster
* Optimize SparseSet::insert (see `PERF` comment on insert)
* Replace SparseArray `Option<T>` with T::MAX to cut down on branching
* would enable cheaper get_unchecked() operations
* upstream fixedbitset optimizations
* fixedbitset could be allocation free for small block counts (store blocks in a SmallVec)
* fixedbitset could have a const constructor
* Consider implementing Tags (archetype-specific by-value data that affects archetype identity)
* ex: ArchetypeA could have `[A, B, C]` table components and `[D(1)]` "tag" component. ArchetypeB could have `[A, B, C]` table components and a `[D(2)]` tag component. The archetypes are different, despite both having D tags because the value inside D is different.
* this could potentially build on top of the `archetype.unique_components` added in this pr for resource storage.
* Consider reverting `all_tuples` proc macro in favor of the old `macro_rules` implementation
* all_tuples is more flexible and produces cleaner documentation (the macro_rules version produces weird type parameter orders due to parser constraints)
* but unfortunately all_tuples also appears to make Rust Analyzer sad/slow when working inside of `bevy_ecs` (does not affect user code)
* Consider "resource queries" and/or "mixed resource and entity component queries" as an alternative to WorldCell
* this is basically just "systems" so maybe it's not worth it
* Add more world ops
* `world.clear()`
* `world.reserve<T: Bundle>(count: usize)`
* Try using the old archetype allocation strategy (allocate new memory on resize and copy everything over). I expect this to improve batch insertion performance at the cost of unbatched performance. But thats just a guess. I'm not an allocation perf pro :)
* Adapt Commands apis for consistency with new World apis
## Benchmarks
key:
* `bevy_old`: bevy `main` branch
* `bevy`: this branch
* `_foreach`: uses an optimized for_each iterator
* ` _sparse`: uses sparse set storage (if unspecified assume table storage)
* `_system`: runs inside a system (if unspecified assume test happens via direct world ops)
### Simple Insert (from ecs_bench_suite)
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/109245573-9c3ce100-7795-11eb-9003-bfd41cd5c51f.png)
### Simpler Iter (from ecs_bench_suite)
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/109245795-ffc70e80-7795-11eb-92fb-3ffad09aabf7.png)
### Fragment Iter (from ecs_bench_suite)
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/109245849-0fdeee00-7796-11eb-8d25-eb6b7a682c48.png)
### Sparse Fragmented Iter
Iterate a query that matches 5 entities from a single matching archetype, but there are 100 unmatching archetypes
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/109245916-2b49f900-7796-11eb-9a8f-ed89c203f940.png)
### Schedule (from ecs_bench_suite)
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/109246428-1fab0200-7797-11eb-8841-1b2161e90fa4.png)
### Add Remove Component (from ecs_bench_suite)
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/109246492-39e4e000-7797-11eb-8985-2706bd0495ab.png)
### Add Remove Component Big
Same as the test above, but each entity has 5 "large" matrix components and 1 "large" matrix component is added and removed
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/109246517-449f7500-7797-11eb-835e-28b6790daeaa.png)
### Get Component
Looks up a single component value a large number of times
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/109246129-87ad1880-7796-11eb-9fcb-c38012aa7c70.png)
2021-03-05 07:54:35 +00:00
|
|
|
) {
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
let SpriteAssetEvents { ref mut images } = *events;
|
|
|
|
images.clear();
|
2020-05-30 19:31:04 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
for image in image_events.iter() {
|
|
|
|
// AssetEvent: !Clone
|
|
|
|
images.push(match image {
|
|
|
|
AssetEvent::Created { handle } => AssetEvent::Created {
|
|
|
|
handle: handle.clone_weak(),
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
AssetEvent::Modified { handle } => AssetEvent::Modified {
|
|
|
|
handle: handle.clone_weak(),
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
AssetEvent::Removed { handle } => AssetEvent::Removed {
|
|
|
|
handle: handle.clone_weak(),
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2020-05-30 19:31:04 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub fn extract_sprites(
|
Make `RenderStage::Extract` run on the render world (#4402)
# Objective
- Currently, the `Extract` `RenderStage` is executed on the main world, with the render world available as a resource.
- However, when needing access to resources in the render world (e.g. to mutate them), the only way to do so was to get exclusive access to the whole `RenderWorld` resource.
- This meant that effectively only one extract which wrote to resources could run at a time.
- We didn't previously make `Extract`ing writing to the world a non-happy path, even though we want to discourage that.
## Solution
- Move the extract stage to run on the render world.
- Add the main world as a `MainWorld` resource.
- Add an `Extract` `SystemParam` as a convenience to access a (read only) `SystemParam` in the main world during `Extract`.
## Future work
It should be possible to avoid needing to use `get_or_spawn` for the render commands, since now the `Commands`' `Entities` matches up with the world being executed on.
We need to determine how this interacts with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3519
It's theoretically possible to remove the need for the `value` method on `Extract`. However, that requires slightly changing the `SystemParam` interface, which would make it more complicated. That would probably mess up the `SystemState` api too.
## Todo
I still need to add doc comments to `Extract`.
---
## Changelog
### Changed
- The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase.
Resources on the render world can now be accessed using `ResMut` during extract.
### Removed
- `Commands::spawn_and_forget`. Use `Commands::get_or_spawn(e).insert_bundle(bundle)` instead
## Migration Guide
The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase. `Extract` takes a single type parameter, which is any system parameter (such as `Res`, `Query` etc.). It will extract this from the main world, and returns the result of this extraction when `value` is called on it.
For example, if previously your extract system looked like:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
for cloud in clouds.iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
the new version would be:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
The diff is:
```diff
--- a/src/clouds.rs
+++ b/src/clouds.rs
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
- for cloud in clouds.iter() {
+fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
+ for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
You can now also access resources from the render world using the normal system parameters during `Extract`:
```rust
fn extract_assets(mut render_assets: ResMut<MyAssets>, source_assets: Extract<Res<MyAssets>>) {
*render_assets = source_assets.clone();
}
```
Please note that all existing extract systems need to be updated to match this new style; even if they currently compile they will not run as expected. A warning will be emitted on a best-effort basis if this is not met.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-08 23:56:33 +00:00
|
|
|
mut extracted_sprites: ResMut<ExtractedSprites>,
|
|
|
|
texture_atlases: Extract<Res<Assets<TextureAtlas>>>,
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
sprite_query: Extract<
|
|
|
|
Query<(
|
|
|
|
Entity,
|
|
|
|
&ComputedVisibility,
|
|
|
|
&Sprite,
|
|
|
|
&GlobalTransform,
|
|
|
|
&Handle<Image>,
|
|
|
|
)>,
|
|
|
|
>,
|
Make `RenderStage::Extract` run on the render world (#4402)
# Objective
- Currently, the `Extract` `RenderStage` is executed on the main world, with the render world available as a resource.
- However, when needing access to resources in the render world (e.g. to mutate them), the only way to do so was to get exclusive access to the whole `RenderWorld` resource.
- This meant that effectively only one extract which wrote to resources could run at a time.
- We didn't previously make `Extract`ing writing to the world a non-happy path, even though we want to discourage that.
## Solution
- Move the extract stage to run on the render world.
- Add the main world as a `MainWorld` resource.
- Add an `Extract` `SystemParam` as a convenience to access a (read only) `SystemParam` in the main world during `Extract`.
## Future work
It should be possible to avoid needing to use `get_or_spawn` for the render commands, since now the `Commands`' `Entities` matches up with the world being executed on.
We need to determine how this interacts with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3519
It's theoretically possible to remove the need for the `value` method on `Extract`. However, that requires slightly changing the `SystemParam` interface, which would make it more complicated. That would probably mess up the `SystemState` api too.
## Todo
I still need to add doc comments to `Extract`.
---
## Changelog
### Changed
- The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase.
Resources on the render world can now be accessed using `ResMut` during extract.
### Removed
- `Commands::spawn_and_forget`. Use `Commands::get_or_spawn(e).insert_bundle(bundle)` instead
## Migration Guide
The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase. `Extract` takes a single type parameter, which is any system parameter (such as `Res`, `Query` etc.). It will extract this from the main world, and returns the result of this extraction when `value` is called on it.
For example, if previously your extract system looked like:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
for cloud in clouds.iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
the new version would be:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
The diff is:
```diff
--- a/src/clouds.rs
+++ b/src/clouds.rs
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
- for cloud in clouds.iter() {
+fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
+ for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
You can now also access resources from the render world using the normal system parameters during `Extract`:
```rust
fn extract_assets(mut render_assets: ResMut<MyAssets>, source_assets: Extract<Res<MyAssets>>) {
*render_assets = source_assets.clone();
}
```
Please note that all existing extract systems need to be updated to match this new style; even if they currently compile they will not run as expected. A warning will be emitted on a best-effort basis if this is not met.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-08 23:56:33 +00:00
|
|
|
atlas_query: Extract<
|
|
|
|
Query<(
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
Entity,
|
|
|
|
&ComputedVisibility,
|
Make `RenderStage::Extract` run on the render world (#4402)
# Objective
- Currently, the `Extract` `RenderStage` is executed on the main world, with the render world available as a resource.
- However, when needing access to resources in the render world (e.g. to mutate them), the only way to do so was to get exclusive access to the whole `RenderWorld` resource.
- This meant that effectively only one extract which wrote to resources could run at a time.
- We didn't previously make `Extract`ing writing to the world a non-happy path, even though we want to discourage that.
## Solution
- Move the extract stage to run on the render world.
- Add the main world as a `MainWorld` resource.
- Add an `Extract` `SystemParam` as a convenience to access a (read only) `SystemParam` in the main world during `Extract`.
## Future work
It should be possible to avoid needing to use `get_or_spawn` for the render commands, since now the `Commands`' `Entities` matches up with the world being executed on.
We need to determine how this interacts with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3519
It's theoretically possible to remove the need for the `value` method on `Extract`. However, that requires slightly changing the `SystemParam` interface, which would make it more complicated. That would probably mess up the `SystemState` api too.
## Todo
I still need to add doc comments to `Extract`.
---
## Changelog
### Changed
- The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase.
Resources on the render world can now be accessed using `ResMut` during extract.
### Removed
- `Commands::spawn_and_forget`. Use `Commands::get_or_spawn(e).insert_bundle(bundle)` instead
## Migration Guide
The `Extract` `RenderStage` now runs on the render world (instead of the main world as before).
You must use the `Extract` `SystemParam` to access the main world during the extract phase. `Extract` takes a single type parameter, which is any system parameter (such as `Res`, `Query` etc.). It will extract this from the main world, and returns the result of this extraction when `value` is called on it.
For example, if previously your extract system looked like:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
for cloud in clouds.iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
the new version would be:
```rust
fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
The diff is:
```diff
--- a/src/clouds.rs
+++ b/src/clouds.rs
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, clouds: Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>) {
- for cloud in clouds.iter() {
+fn extract_clouds(mut commands: Commands, mut clouds: Extract<Query<Entity, With<Cloud>>>) {
+ for cloud in clouds.value().iter() {
commands.get_or_spawn(cloud).insert(Cloud);
}
}
```
You can now also access resources from the render world using the normal system parameters during `Extract`:
```rust
fn extract_assets(mut render_assets: ResMut<MyAssets>, source_assets: Extract<Res<MyAssets>>) {
*render_assets = source_assets.clone();
}
```
Please note that all existing extract systems need to be updated to match this new style; even if they currently compile they will not run as expected. A warning will be emitted on a best-effort basis if this is not met.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-08 23:56:33 +00:00
|
|
|
&TextureAtlasSprite,
|
|
|
|
&GlobalTransform,
|
|
|
|
&Handle<TextureAtlas>,
|
|
|
|
)>,
|
|
|
|
>,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
) {
|
|
|
|
extracted_sprites.sprites.clear();
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
for (entity, visibility, sprite, transform, handle) in sprite_query.iter() {
|
|
|
|
if !visibility.is_visible() {
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
// PERF: we don't check in this function that the `Image` asset is ready, since it should be in most cases and hashing the handle is expensive
|
2022-09-27 18:11:40 +00:00
|
|
|
extracted_sprites.sprites.push(ExtractedSprite {
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
entity,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
color: sprite.color,
|
|
|
|
transform: *transform,
|
2022-09-18 22:49:27 +00:00
|
|
|
rect: sprite.rect,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
// Pass the custom size
|
|
|
|
custom_size: sprite.custom_size,
|
|
|
|
flip_x: sprite.flip_x,
|
|
|
|
flip_y: sprite.flip_y,
|
2022-10-06 13:33:30 +00:00
|
|
|
image_handle_id: handle.id(),
|
2022-04-04 22:09:59 +00:00
|
|
|
anchor: sprite.anchor.as_vec(),
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
});
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
for (entity, visibility, atlas_sprite, transform, texture_atlas_handle) in atlas_query.iter() {
|
|
|
|
if !visibility.is_visible() {
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if let Some(texture_atlas) = texture_atlases.get(texture_atlas_handle) {
|
2022-10-28 21:03:01 +00:00
|
|
|
let rect = Some(texture_atlas.textures[atlas_sprite.index]);
|
2022-09-27 18:11:40 +00:00
|
|
|
extracted_sprites.sprites.push(ExtractedSprite {
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
entity,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
color: atlas_sprite.color,
|
|
|
|
transform: *transform,
|
|
|
|
// Select the area in the texture atlas
|
|
|
|
rect,
|
|
|
|
// Pass the custom size
|
|
|
|
custom_size: atlas_sprite.custom_size,
|
|
|
|
flip_x: atlas_sprite.flip_x,
|
|
|
|
flip_y: atlas_sprite.flip_y,
|
2022-10-06 13:33:30 +00:00
|
|
|
image_handle_id: texture_atlas.texture.id(),
|
2022-04-04 22:09:59 +00:00
|
|
|
anchor: atlas_sprite.anchor.as_vec(),
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
});
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#[repr(C)]
|
|
|
|
#[derive(Copy, Clone, Pod, Zeroable)]
|
|
|
|
struct SpriteVertex {
|
|
|
|
pub position: [f32; 3],
|
|
|
|
pub uv: [f32; 2],
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#[repr(C)]
|
|
|
|
#[derive(Copy, Clone, Pod, Zeroable)]
|
|
|
|
struct ColoredSpriteVertex {
|
|
|
|
pub position: [f32; 3],
|
|
|
|
pub uv: [f32; 2],
|
2022-03-30 19:38:24 +00:00
|
|
|
pub color: [f32; 4],
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Make `Resource` trait opt-in, requiring `#[derive(Resource)]` V2 (#5577)
*This PR description is an edited copy of #5007, written by @alice-i-cecile.*
# Objective
Follow-up to https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/2254. The `Resource` trait currently has a blanket implementation for all types that meet its bounds.
While ergonomic, this results in several drawbacks:
* it is possible to make confusing, silent mistakes such as inserting a function pointer (Foo) rather than a value (Foo::Bar) as a resource
* it is challenging to discover if a type is intended to be used as a resource
* we cannot later add customization options (see the [RFC](https://github.com/bevyengine/rfcs/blob/main/rfcs/27-derive-component.md) for the equivalent choice for Component).
* dependencies can use the same Rust type as a resource in invisibly conflicting ways
* raw Rust types used as resources cannot preserve privacy appropriately, as anyone able to access that type can read and write to internal values
* we cannot capture a definitive list of possible resources to display to users in an editor
## Notes to reviewers
* Review this commit-by-commit; there's effectively no back-tracking and there's a lot of churn in some of these commits.
*ira: My commits are not as well organized :')*
* I've relaxed the bound on Local to Send + Sync + 'static: I don't think these concerns apply there, so this can keep things simple. Storing e.g. a u32 in a Local is fine, because there's a variable name attached explaining what it does.
* I think this is a bad place for the Resource trait to live, but I've left it in place to make reviewing easier. IMO that's best tackled with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/4981.
## Changelog
`Resource` is no longer automatically implemented for all matching types. Instead, use the new `#[derive(Resource)]` macro.
## Migration Guide
Add `#[derive(Resource)]` to all types you are using as a resource.
If you are using a third party type as a resource, wrap it in a tuple struct to bypass orphan rules. Consider deriving `Deref` and `DerefMut` to improve ergonomics.
`ClearColor` no longer implements `Component`. Using `ClearColor` as a component in 0.8 did nothing.
Use the `ClearColorConfig` in the `Camera3d` and `Camera2d` components instead.
Co-authored-by: Alice <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: devil-ira <justthecooldude@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-08-08 21:36:35 +00:00
|
|
|
#[derive(Resource)]
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct SpriteMeta {
|
|
|
|
vertices: BufferVec<SpriteVertex>,
|
|
|
|
colored_vertices: BufferVec<ColoredSpriteVertex>,
|
|
|
|
view_bind_group: Option<BindGroup>,
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
impl Default for SpriteMeta {
|
|
|
|
fn default() -> Self {
|
|
|
|
Self {
|
|
|
|
vertices: BufferVec::new(BufferUsages::VERTEX),
|
|
|
|
colored_vertices: BufferVec::new(BufferUsages::VERTEX),
|
|
|
|
view_bind_group: None,
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
const QUAD_INDICES: [usize; 6] = [0, 2, 3, 0, 1, 2];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const QUAD_VERTEX_POSITIONS: [Vec2; 4] = [
|
2022-07-03 19:55:33 +00:00
|
|
|
Vec2::new(-0.5, -0.5),
|
|
|
|
Vec2::new(0.5, -0.5),
|
|
|
|
Vec2::new(0.5, 0.5),
|
|
|
|
Vec2::new(-0.5, 0.5),
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
];
|
|
|
|
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
const QUAD_UVS: [Vec2; 4] = [
|
2022-07-03 19:55:33 +00:00
|
|
|
Vec2::new(0., 1.),
|
|
|
|
Vec2::new(1., 1.),
|
|
|
|
Vec2::new(1., 0.),
|
|
|
|
Vec2::new(0., 0.),
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#[derive(Component, Eq, PartialEq, Copy, Clone)]
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct SpriteBatch {
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
image_handle_id: HandleId,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
colored: bool,
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Make `Resource` trait opt-in, requiring `#[derive(Resource)]` V2 (#5577)
*This PR description is an edited copy of #5007, written by @alice-i-cecile.*
# Objective
Follow-up to https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/2254. The `Resource` trait currently has a blanket implementation for all types that meet its bounds.
While ergonomic, this results in several drawbacks:
* it is possible to make confusing, silent mistakes such as inserting a function pointer (Foo) rather than a value (Foo::Bar) as a resource
* it is challenging to discover if a type is intended to be used as a resource
* we cannot later add customization options (see the [RFC](https://github.com/bevyengine/rfcs/blob/main/rfcs/27-derive-component.md) for the equivalent choice for Component).
* dependencies can use the same Rust type as a resource in invisibly conflicting ways
* raw Rust types used as resources cannot preserve privacy appropriately, as anyone able to access that type can read and write to internal values
* we cannot capture a definitive list of possible resources to display to users in an editor
## Notes to reviewers
* Review this commit-by-commit; there's effectively no back-tracking and there's a lot of churn in some of these commits.
*ira: My commits are not as well organized :')*
* I've relaxed the bound on Local to Send + Sync + 'static: I don't think these concerns apply there, so this can keep things simple. Storing e.g. a u32 in a Local is fine, because there's a variable name attached explaining what it does.
* I think this is a bad place for the Resource trait to live, but I've left it in place to make reviewing easier. IMO that's best tackled with https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/4981.
## Changelog
`Resource` is no longer automatically implemented for all matching types. Instead, use the new `#[derive(Resource)]` macro.
## Migration Guide
Add `#[derive(Resource)]` to all types you are using as a resource.
If you are using a third party type as a resource, wrap it in a tuple struct to bypass orphan rules. Consider deriving `Deref` and `DerefMut` to improve ergonomics.
`ClearColor` no longer implements `Component`. Using `ClearColor` as a component in 0.8 did nothing.
Use the `ClearColorConfig` in the `Camera3d` and `Camera2d` components instead.
Co-authored-by: Alice <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: devil-ira <justthecooldude@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-08-08 21:36:35 +00:00
|
|
|
#[derive(Resource, Default)]
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct ImageBindGroups {
|
|
|
|
values: HashMap<Handle<Image>, BindGroup>,
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#[allow(clippy::too_many_arguments)]
|
|
|
|
pub fn queue_sprites(
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
mut commands: Commands,
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
mut view_entities: Local<FixedBitSet>,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
draw_functions: Res<DrawFunctions<Transparent2d>>,
|
|
|
|
render_device: Res<RenderDevice>,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
render_queue: Res<RenderQueue>,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
mut sprite_meta: ResMut<SpriteMeta>,
|
|
|
|
view_uniforms: Res<ViewUniforms>,
|
|
|
|
sprite_pipeline: Res<SpritePipeline>,
|
2022-03-23 00:27:26 +00:00
|
|
|
mut pipelines: ResMut<SpecializedRenderPipelines<SpritePipeline>>,
|
2023-01-16 15:41:14 +00:00
|
|
|
pipeline_cache: Res<PipelineCache>,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
mut image_bind_groups: ResMut<ImageBindGroups>,
|
|
|
|
gpu_images: Res<RenderAssets<Image>>,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
msaa: Res<Msaa>,
|
|
|
|
mut extracted_sprites: ResMut<ExtractedSprites>,
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
mut views: Query<(
|
|
|
|
&mut RenderPhase<Transparent2d>,
|
|
|
|
&VisibleEntities,
|
|
|
|
&ExtractedView,
|
|
|
|
Option<&Tonemapping>,
|
|
|
|
)>,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
events: Res<SpriteAssetEvents>,
|
|
|
|
) {
|
|
|
|
// If an image has changed, the GpuImage has (probably) changed
|
|
|
|
for event in &events.images {
|
|
|
|
match event {
|
|
|
|
AssetEvent::Created { .. } => None,
|
2022-05-31 01:38:07 +00:00
|
|
|
AssetEvent::Modified { handle } | AssetEvent::Removed { handle } => {
|
|
|
|
image_bind_groups.values.remove(handle)
|
|
|
|
}
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-20 14:25:21 +00:00
|
|
|
let msaa_key = SpritePipelineKey::from_msaa_samples(msaa.samples());
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
if let Some(view_binding) = view_uniforms.uniforms.binding() {
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
let sprite_meta = &mut sprite_meta;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Clear the vertex buffers
|
|
|
|
sprite_meta.vertices.clear();
|
|
|
|
sprite_meta.colored_vertices.clear();
|
|
|
|
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
sprite_meta.view_bind_group = Some(render_device.create_bind_group(&BindGroupDescriptor {
|
|
|
|
entries: &[BindGroupEntry {
|
|
|
|
binding: 0,
|
|
|
|
resource: view_binding,
|
|
|
|
}],
|
|
|
|
label: Some("sprite_view_bind_group"),
|
|
|
|
layout: &sprite_pipeline.view_layout,
|
|
|
|
}));
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2022-11-28 13:54:13 +00:00
|
|
|
let draw_sprite_function = draw_functions.read().id::<DrawSprite>();
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Vertex buffer indices
|
|
|
|
let mut index = 0;
|
|
|
|
let mut colored_index = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
// FIXME: VisibleEntities is ignored
|
|
|
|
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
let extracted_sprites = &mut extracted_sprites.sprites;
|
|
|
|
// Sort sprites by z for correct transparency and then by handle to improve batching
|
|
|
|
// NOTE: This can be done independent of views by reasonably assuming that all 2D views look along the negative-z axis in world space
|
|
|
|
extracted_sprites.sort_unstable_by(|a, b| {
|
|
|
|
match a
|
|
|
|
.transform
|
2022-07-16 00:51:12 +00:00
|
|
|
.translation()
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
.z
|
2022-07-16 00:51:12 +00:00
|
|
|
.partial_cmp(&b.transform.translation().z)
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
Some(Ordering::Equal) | None => a.image_handle_id.cmp(&b.image_handle_id),
|
|
|
|
Some(other) => other,
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
let image_bind_groups = &mut *image_bind_groups;
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
for (mut transparent_phase, visible_entities, view, tonemapping) in &mut views {
|
|
|
|
let mut view_key = SpritePipelineKey::from_hdr(view.hdr) | msaa_key;
|
Fix color banding by dithering image before quantization (#5264)
# Objective
- Closes #5262
- Fix color banding caused by quantization.
## Solution
- Adds dithering to the tonemapping node from #3425.
- This is inspired by Godot's default "debanding" shader: https://gist.github.com/belzecue/
- Unlike Godot:
- debanding happens after tonemapping. My understanding is that this is preferred, because we are running the debanding at the last moment before quantization (`[f32, f32, f32, f32]` -> `f32`). This ensures we aren't biasing the dithering strength by applying it in a different (linear) color space.
- This code instead uses and reference the origin source, Valve at GDC 2015
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-44-46](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218880-70f4cdab-a1ed-44de-a88c-8759e77197f1.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-41-11](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218883-72393352-b162-41da-88bb-6e54a1e26853.png)
## Additional Notes
Real time rendering to standard dynamic range outputs is limited to 8 bits of depth per color channel. Internally we keep everything in full 32-bit precision (`vec4<f32>`) inside passes and 16-bit between passes until the image is ready to be displayed, at which point the GPU implicitly converts our `vec4<f32>` into a single 32bit value per pixel, with each channel (rgba) getting 8 of those 32 bits.
### The Problem
8 bits of color depth is simply not enough precision to make each step invisible - we only have 256 values per channel! Human vision can perceive steps in luma to about 14 bits of precision. When drawing a very slight gradient, the transition between steps become visible because with a gradient, neighboring pixels will all jump to the next "step" of precision at the same time.
### The Solution
One solution is to simply output in HDR - more bits of color data means the transition between bands will become smaller. However, not everyone has hardware that supports 10+ bit color depth. Additionally, 10 bit color doesn't even fully solve the issue, banding will result in coherent bands on shallow gradients, but the steps will be harder to perceive.
The solution in this PR adds noise to the signal before it is "quantized" or resampled from 32 to 8 bits. Done naively, it's easy to add unneeded noise to the image. To ensure dithering is correct and absolutely minimal, noise is adding *within* one step of the output color depth. When converting from the 32bit to 8bit signal, the value is rounded to the nearest 8 bit value (0 - 255). Banding occurs around the transition from one value to the next, let's say from 50-51. Dithering will never add more than +/-0.5 bits of noise, so the pixels near this transition might round to 50 instead of 51 but will never round more than one step. This means that the output image won't have excess variance:
- in a gradient from 49 to 51, there will be a step between each band at 49, 50, and 51.
- Done correctly, the modified image of this gradient will never have a adjacent pixels more than one step (0-255) from each other.
- I.e. when scanning across the gradient you should expect to see:
```
|-band-| |-band-| |-band-|
Baseline: 49 49 49 50 50 50 51 51 51
Dithered: 49 50 49 50 50 51 50 51 51
Dithered (wrong): 49 50 51 49 50 51 49 51 50
```
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-12-36](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219075-ab3f46be-d4e9-4869-b66b-a92e1706f49e.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-11-48](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219079-ec5d2add-817d-487a-8fc1-84569c9cda73.png)
You can see from above how correct dithering "fuzzes" the transition between bands to reduce distinct steps in color, without adding excess noise.
### HDR
The previous section (and this PR) assumes the final output is to an 8-bit texture, however this is not always the case. When Bevy adds HDR support, the dithering code will need to take the per-channel depth into account instead of assuming it to be 0-255. Edit: I talked with Rob about this and it seems like the current solution is okay. We may need to revisit once we have actual HDR final image output.
---
## Changelog
### Added
- All pipelines now support deband dithering. This is enabled by default in 3D, and can be toggled in the `Tonemapping` component in camera bundles. Banding is a graphical artifact created when the rendered image is crunched from high precision (f32 per color channel) down to the final output (u8 per channel in SDR). This results in subtle gradients becoming blocky due to the reduced color precision. Deband dithering applies a small amount of noise to the signal before it is "crunched", which breaks up the hard edges of blocks (bands) of color. Note that this does not add excess noise to the image, as the amount of noise is less than a single step of a color channel - just enough to break up the transition between color blocks in a gradient.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-11-11 19:43:45 +00:00
|
|
|
if let Some(Tonemapping::Enabled { deband_dither }) = tonemapping {
|
|
|
|
if !view.hdr {
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
view_key |= SpritePipelineKey::TONEMAP_IN_SHADER;
|
Fix color banding by dithering image before quantization (#5264)
# Objective
- Closes #5262
- Fix color banding caused by quantization.
## Solution
- Adds dithering to the tonemapping node from #3425.
- This is inspired by Godot's default "debanding" shader: https://gist.github.com/belzecue/
- Unlike Godot:
- debanding happens after tonemapping. My understanding is that this is preferred, because we are running the debanding at the last moment before quantization (`[f32, f32, f32, f32]` -> `f32`). This ensures we aren't biasing the dithering strength by applying it in a different (linear) color space.
- This code instead uses and reference the origin source, Valve at GDC 2015
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-44-46](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218880-70f4cdab-a1ed-44de-a88c-8759e77197f1.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 13-41-11](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201218883-72393352-b162-41da-88bb-6e54a1e26853.png)
## Additional Notes
Real time rendering to standard dynamic range outputs is limited to 8 bits of depth per color channel. Internally we keep everything in full 32-bit precision (`vec4<f32>`) inside passes and 16-bit between passes until the image is ready to be displayed, at which point the GPU implicitly converts our `vec4<f32>` into a single 32bit value per pixel, with each channel (rgba) getting 8 of those 32 bits.
### The Problem
8 bits of color depth is simply not enough precision to make each step invisible - we only have 256 values per channel! Human vision can perceive steps in luma to about 14 bits of precision. When drawing a very slight gradient, the transition between steps become visible because with a gradient, neighboring pixels will all jump to the next "step" of precision at the same time.
### The Solution
One solution is to simply output in HDR - more bits of color data means the transition between bands will become smaller. However, not everyone has hardware that supports 10+ bit color depth. Additionally, 10 bit color doesn't even fully solve the issue, banding will result in coherent bands on shallow gradients, but the steps will be harder to perceive.
The solution in this PR adds noise to the signal before it is "quantized" or resampled from 32 to 8 bits. Done naively, it's easy to add unneeded noise to the image. To ensure dithering is correct and absolutely minimal, noise is adding *within* one step of the output color depth. When converting from the 32bit to 8bit signal, the value is rounded to the nearest 8 bit value (0 - 255). Banding occurs around the transition from one value to the next, let's say from 50-51. Dithering will never add more than +/-0.5 bits of noise, so the pixels near this transition might round to 50 instead of 51 but will never round more than one step. This means that the output image won't have excess variance:
- in a gradient from 49 to 51, there will be a step between each band at 49, 50, and 51.
- Done correctly, the modified image of this gradient will never have a adjacent pixels more than one step (0-255) from each other.
- I.e. when scanning across the gradient you should expect to see:
```
|-band-| |-band-| |-band-|
Baseline: 49 49 49 50 50 50 51 51 51
Dithered: 49 50 49 50 50 51 50 51 51
Dithered (wrong): 49 50 51 49 50 51 49 51 50
```
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-12-36](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219075-ab3f46be-d4e9-4869-b66b-a92e1706f49e.png)
![Screenshot from 2022-11-10 14-11-48](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2632925/201219079-ec5d2add-817d-487a-8fc1-84569c9cda73.png)
You can see from above how correct dithering "fuzzes" the transition between bands to reduce distinct steps in color, without adding excess noise.
### HDR
The previous section (and this PR) assumes the final output is to an 8-bit texture, however this is not always the case. When Bevy adds HDR support, the dithering code will need to take the per-channel depth into account instead of assuming it to be 0-255. Edit: I talked with Rob about this and it seems like the current solution is okay. We may need to revisit once we have actual HDR final image output.
---
## Changelog
### Added
- All pipelines now support deband dithering. This is enabled by default in 3D, and can be toggled in the `Tonemapping` component in camera bundles. Banding is a graphical artifact created when the rendered image is crunched from high precision (f32 per color channel) down to the final output (u8 per channel in SDR). This results in subtle gradients becoming blocky due to the reduced color precision. Deband dithering applies a small amount of noise to the signal before it is "crunched", which breaks up the hard edges of blocks (bands) of color. Note that this does not add excess noise to the image, as the amount of noise is less than a single step of a color channel - just enough to break up the transition between color blocks in a gradient.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-11-11 19:43:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if *deband_dither {
|
|
|
|
view_key |= SpritePipelineKey::DEBAND_DITHER;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
let pipeline = pipelines.specialize(
|
2023-01-16 15:41:14 +00:00
|
|
|
&pipeline_cache,
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
&sprite_pipeline,
|
|
|
|
view_key | SpritePipelineKey::from_colored(false),
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
let colored_pipeline = pipelines.specialize(
|
2023-01-16 15:41:14 +00:00
|
|
|
&pipeline_cache,
|
2022-10-26 20:13:59 +00:00
|
|
|
&sprite_pipeline,
|
|
|
|
view_key | SpritePipelineKey::from_colored(true),
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
view_entities.clear();
|
2022-11-02 15:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
view_entities.extend(visible_entities.entities.iter().map(|e| e.index() as usize));
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
transparent_phase.items.reserve(extracted_sprites.len());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Impossible starting values that will be replaced on the first iteration
|
|
|
|
let mut current_batch = SpriteBatch {
|
|
|
|
image_handle_id: HandleId::Id(Uuid::nil(), u64::MAX),
|
|
|
|
colored: false,
|
|
|
|
};
|
2022-11-28 13:40:10 +00:00
|
|
|
let mut current_batch_entity = Entity::PLACEHOLDER;
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
let mut current_image_size = Vec2::ZERO;
|
2023-01-06 00:43:30 +00:00
|
|
|
// Add a phase item for each sprite, and detect when successive items can be batched.
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
// Spawn an entity with a `SpriteBatch` component for each possible batch.
|
|
|
|
// Compatible items share the same entity.
|
|
|
|
// Batches are merged later (in `batch_phase_system()`), so that they can be interrupted
|
|
|
|
// by any other phase item (and they can interrupt other items from batching).
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
for extracted_sprite in extracted_sprites.iter() {
|
2022-11-02 15:19:50 +00:00
|
|
|
if !view_entities.contains(extracted_sprite.entity.index() as usize) {
|
Visibilty Inheritance, universal ComputedVisibility and RenderLayers support (#5310)
# Objective
Fixes #4907. Fixes #838. Fixes #5089.
Supersedes #5146. Supersedes #2087. Supersedes #865. Supersedes #5114
Visibility is currently entirely local. Set a parent entity to be invisible, and the children are still visible. This makes it hard for users to hide entire hierarchies of entities.
Additionally, the semantics of `Visibility` vs `ComputedVisibility` are inconsistent across entity types. 3D meshes use `ComputedVisibility` as the "definitive" visibility component, with `Visibility` being just one data source. Sprites just use `Visibility`, which means they can't feed off of `ComputedVisibility` data, such as culling information, RenderLayers, and (added in this pr) visibility inheritance information.
## Solution
Splits `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible` into `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_view` and `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible_in_hierarchy`. For each visible entity, `is_visible_in_hierarchy` is computed by propagating visibility down the hierarchy. The `ComputedVisibility::is_visible()` function combines these two booleans for the canonical "is this entity visible" function.
Additionally, all entities that have `Visibility` now also have `ComputedVisibility`. Sprites, Lights, and UI entities now use `ComputedVisibility` when appropriate.
This means that in addition to visibility inheritance, everything using Visibility now also supports RenderLayers. Notably, Sprites (and other 2d objects) now support `RenderLayers` and work properly across multiple views.
Also note that this does increase the amount of work done per sprite. Bevymark with 100,000 sprites on `main` runs in `0.017612` seconds and this runs in `0.01902`. That is certainly a gap, but I believe the api consistency and extra functionality this buys us is worth it. See [this thread](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for more info. Note that #5146 in combination with #5114 _are_ a viable alternative to this PR and _would_ perform better, but that comes at the cost of api inconsistencies and doing visibility calculations in the "wrong" place. The current visibility system does have potential for performance improvements. I would prefer to evolve that one system as a whole rather than doing custom hacks / different behaviors for each feature slice.
Here is a "split screen" example where the left camera uses RenderLayers to filter out the blue sprite.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2694663/178814868-2e9a2173-bf8c-4c79-8815-633899d492c3.png)
Note that this builds directly on #5146 and that @james7132 deserves the credit for the baseline visibility inheritance work. This pr moves the inherited visibility field into `ComputedVisibility`, then does the additional work of porting everything to `ComputedVisibility`. See my [comments here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/5146#issuecomment-1182783452) for rationale.
## Follow up work
* Now that lights use ComputedVisibility, VisibleEntities now includes "visible lights" in the entity list. Functionally not a problem as we use queries to filter the list down in the desired context. But we should consider splitting this out into a separate`VisibleLights` collection for both clarity and performance reasons. And _maybe_ even consider scoping `VisibleEntities` down to `VisibleMeshes`?.
* Investigate alternative sprite rendering impls (in combination with visibility system tweaks) that avoid re-generating a per-view fixedbitset of visible entities every frame, then checking each ExtractedEntity. This is where most of the performance overhead lives. Ex: we could generate ExtractedEntities per-view using the VisibleEntities list, avoiding the need for the bitset.
* Should ComputedVisibility use bitflags under the hood? This would cut down on the size of the component, potentially speed up the `is_visible()` function, and allow us to cheaply expand ComputedVisibility with more data (ex: split out local visibility and parent visibility, add more culling classes, etc).
---
## Changelog
* ComputedVisibility now takes hierarchy visibility into account.
* 2D, UI and Light entities now use the ComputedVisibility component.
## Migration Guide
If you were previously reading `Visibility::is_visible` as the "actual visibility" for sprites or lights, use `ComputedVisibilty::is_visible()` instead:
```rust
// before (0.7)
fn system(query: Query<&Visibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
// after (0.8)
fn system(query: Query<&ComputedVisibility>) {
for visibility in query.iter() {
if visibility.is_visible() {
log!("found visible entity");
}
}
}
```
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-07-15 23:24:42 +00:00
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
let new_batch = SpriteBatch {
|
|
|
|
image_handle_id: extracted_sprite.image_handle_id,
|
|
|
|
colored: extracted_sprite.color != Color::WHITE,
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
if new_batch != current_batch {
|
|
|
|
// Set-up a new possible batch
|
|
|
|
if let Some(gpu_image) =
|
|
|
|
gpu_images.get(&Handle::weak(new_batch.image_handle_id))
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
current_batch = new_batch;
|
2022-04-25 13:54:46 +00:00
|
|
|
current_image_size = Vec2::new(gpu_image.size.x, gpu_image.size.y);
|
2022-10-29 18:15:28 +00:00
|
|
|
current_batch_entity = commands.spawn(current_batch).id();
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
image_bind_groups
|
|
|
|
.values
|
|
|
|
.entry(Handle::weak(current_batch.image_handle_id))
|
|
|
|
.or_insert_with(|| {
|
|
|
|
render_device.create_bind_group(&BindGroupDescriptor {
|
|
|
|
entries: &[
|
|
|
|
BindGroupEntry {
|
|
|
|
binding: 0,
|
|
|
|
resource: BindingResource::TextureView(
|
|
|
|
&gpu_image.texture_view,
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
BindGroupEntry {
|
|
|
|
binding: 1,
|
|
|
|
resource: BindingResource::Sampler(&gpu_image.sampler),
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
label: Some("sprite_material_bind_group"),
|
|
|
|
layout: &sprite_pipeline.material_layout,
|
|
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
});
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
// Skip this item if the texture is not ready
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Calculate vertex data for this item
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
let mut uvs = QUAD_UVS;
|
|
|
|
if extracted_sprite.flip_x {
|
|
|
|
uvs = [uvs[1], uvs[0], uvs[3], uvs[2]];
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if extracted_sprite.flip_y {
|
|
|
|
uvs = [uvs[3], uvs[2], uvs[1], uvs[0]];
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// By default, the size of the quad is the size of the texture
|
|
|
|
let mut quad_size = current_image_size;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// If a rect is specified, adjust UVs and the size of the quad
|
|
|
|
if let Some(rect) = extracted_sprite.rect {
|
|
|
|
let rect_size = rect.size();
|
|
|
|
for uv in &mut uvs {
|
|
|
|
*uv = (rect.min + *uv * rect_size) / current_image_size;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
quad_size = rect_size;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Override the size if a custom one is specified
|
|
|
|
if let Some(custom_size) = extracted_sprite.custom_size {
|
|
|
|
quad_size = custom_size;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Apply size and global transform
|
|
|
|
let positions = QUAD_VERTEX_POSITIONS.map(|quad_pos| {
|
|
|
|
extracted_sprite
|
|
|
|
.transform
|
2022-10-10 16:50:17 +00:00
|
|
|
.transform_point(
|
|
|
|
((quad_pos - extracted_sprite.anchor) * quad_size).extend(0.),
|
|
|
|
)
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
.into()
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
});
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// These items will be sorted by depth with other phase items
|
2022-07-16 00:51:12 +00:00
|
|
|
let sort_key = FloatOrd(extracted_sprite.transform.translation().z);
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Store the vertex data and add the item to the render phase
|
|
|
|
if current_batch.colored {
|
2022-05-31 01:38:07 +00:00
|
|
|
for i in QUAD_INDICES {
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
sprite_meta.colored_vertices.push(ColoredSpriteVertex {
|
2022-05-31 01:38:07 +00:00
|
|
|
position: positions[i],
|
|
|
|
uv: uvs[i].into(),
|
2022-03-30 19:38:24 +00:00
|
|
|
color: extracted_sprite.color.as_linear_rgba_f32(),
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
let item_start = colored_index;
|
|
|
|
colored_index += QUAD_INDICES.len() as u32;
|
|
|
|
let item_end = colored_index;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
transparent_phase.add(Transparent2d {
|
|
|
|
draw_function: draw_sprite_function,
|
|
|
|
pipeline: colored_pipeline,
|
|
|
|
entity: current_batch_entity,
|
|
|
|
sort_key,
|
|
|
|
batch_range: Some(item_start..item_end),
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
2022-05-31 01:38:07 +00:00
|
|
|
for i in QUAD_INDICES {
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
sprite_meta.vertices.push(SpriteVertex {
|
2022-05-31 01:38:07 +00:00
|
|
|
position: positions[i],
|
|
|
|
uv: uvs[i].into(),
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
let item_start = index;
|
|
|
|
index += QUAD_INDICES.len() as u32;
|
|
|
|
let item_end = index;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
transparent_phase.add(Transparent2d {
|
|
|
|
draw_function: draw_sprite_function,
|
|
|
|
pipeline,
|
|
|
|
entity: current_batch_entity,
|
|
|
|
sort_key,
|
|
|
|
batch_range: Some(item_start..item_end),
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
}
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
sprite_meta
|
|
|
|
.vertices
|
|
|
|
.write_buffer(&render_device, &render_queue);
|
|
|
|
sprite_meta
|
|
|
|
.colored_vertices
|
|
|
|
.write_buffer(&render_device, &render_queue);
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pub type DrawSprite = (
|
|
|
|
SetItemPipeline,
|
|
|
|
SetSpriteViewBindGroup<0>,
|
|
|
|
SetSpriteTextureBindGroup<1>,
|
|
|
|
DrawSpriteBatch,
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pub struct SetSpriteViewBindGroup<const I: usize>;
|
2023-01-04 01:13:30 +00:00
|
|
|
impl<P: PhaseItem, const I: usize> RenderCommand<P> for SetSpriteViewBindGroup<I> {
|
|
|
|
type Param = SRes<SpriteMeta>;
|
|
|
|
type ViewWorldQuery = Read<ViewUniformOffset>;
|
|
|
|
type ItemWorldQuery = ();
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fn render<'w>(
|
2023-01-04 01:13:30 +00:00
|
|
|
_item: &P,
|
|
|
|
view_uniform: &'_ ViewUniformOffset,
|
|
|
|
_entity: (),
|
|
|
|
sprite_meta: SystemParamItem<'w, '_, Self::Param>,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pass: &mut TrackedRenderPass<'w>,
|
|
|
|
) -> RenderCommandResult {
|
|
|
|
pass.set_bind_group(
|
|
|
|
I,
|
|
|
|
sprite_meta.into_inner().view_bind_group.as_ref().unwrap(),
|
|
|
|
&[view_uniform.offset],
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
RenderCommandResult::Success
|
|
|
|
}
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct SetSpriteTextureBindGroup<const I: usize>;
|
2023-01-04 01:13:30 +00:00
|
|
|
impl<P: PhaseItem, const I: usize> RenderCommand<P> for SetSpriteTextureBindGroup<I> {
|
|
|
|
type Param = SRes<ImageBindGroups>;
|
|
|
|
type ViewWorldQuery = ();
|
|
|
|
type ItemWorldQuery = Read<SpriteBatch>;
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fn render<'w>(
|
2023-01-04 01:13:30 +00:00
|
|
|
_item: &P,
|
|
|
|
_view: (),
|
|
|
|
sprite_batch: &'_ SpriteBatch,
|
|
|
|
image_bind_groups: SystemParamItem<'w, '_, Self::Param>,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pass: &mut TrackedRenderPass<'w>,
|
|
|
|
) -> RenderCommandResult {
|
|
|
|
let image_bind_groups = image_bind_groups.into_inner();
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pass.set_bind_group(
|
2022-02-08 23:18:11 +00:00
|
|
|
I,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
image_bind_groups
|
|
|
|
.values
|
|
|
|
.get(&Handle::weak(sprite_batch.image_handle_id))
|
|
|
|
.unwrap(),
|
|
|
|
&[],
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
RenderCommandResult::Success
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pub struct DrawSpriteBatch;
|
|
|
|
impl<P: BatchedPhaseItem> RenderCommand<P> for DrawSpriteBatch {
|
2023-01-04 01:13:30 +00:00
|
|
|
type Param = SRes<SpriteMeta>;
|
|
|
|
type ViewWorldQuery = ();
|
|
|
|
type ItemWorldQuery = Read<SpriteBatch>;
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fn render<'w>(
|
|
|
|
item: &P,
|
2023-01-04 01:13:30 +00:00
|
|
|
_view: (),
|
|
|
|
sprite_batch: &'_ SpriteBatch,
|
|
|
|
sprite_meta: SystemParamItem<'w, '_, Self::Param>,
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
pass: &mut TrackedRenderPass<'w>,
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
) -> RenderCommandResult {
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
let sprite_meta = sprite_meta.into_inner();
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
if sprite_batch.colored {
|
|
|
|
pass.set_vertex_buffer(0, sprite_meta.colored_vertices.buffer().unwrap().slice(..));
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
pass.set_vertex_buffer(0, sprite_meta.vertices.buffer().unwrap().slice(..));
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective
The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d.
## Solution
I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes.
~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_
## Remaining work
- ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_
- ~~add an example~~ _done_
- support 2d meshes & materials in the UI?
- bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine)
## Remaining questions
- ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_
- ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_
- ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
2022-01-08 01:29:08 +00:00
|
|
|
pass.draw(item.batch_range().as_ref().unwrap().clone(), 0..1);
|
|
|
|
RenderCommandResult::Success
|
2021-12-14 03:58:23 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2020-05-30 19:31:04 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|