# Objective
Relevant: #15208
## Solution
I went ahead and added the variadics documentation in all applicable
locations.
## Testing
- I built the documentation and inspected it to see whether the feature
is there.
# Objective
Fixes#15367.
Currently, required components can only be defined through the `require`
macro attribute. While this should be used in most cases, there are also
several instances where you may want to define requirements at runtime,
commonly in plugins.
Example use cases:
- Require components only if the relevant optional plugins are enabled.
For example, a `SleepTimer` component (for physics) is only relevant if
the `SleepPlugin` is enabled.
- Third party crates can define their own requirements for first party
types. For example, "each `Handle<Mesh>` should require my custom
rendering data components". This also gets around the orphan rule.
- Generic plugins that add marker components based on the existence of
other components, like a generic `ColliderPlugin<C: AnyCollider>` that
wants to add a `ColliderMarker` component for all types of colliders.
- This is currently relevant for the retained render world in #15320.
The `ExtractComponentPlugin<C>` should add `SyncToRenderWorld` to all
components that should be extracted. This is currently done with
observers, which is more expensive than required components, and causes
archetype moves.
- Replace some built-in components with custom versions. For example, if
`GlobalTransform` required `Transform` through `TransformPlugin`, but we
wanted to use a `CustomTransform` type, we could replace
`TransformPlugin` with our own plugin. (This specific example isn't
good, but there are likely better use cases where this may be useful)
See #15367 for more in-depth reasoning.
## Solution
Add `register_required_components::<T, R>` and
`register_required_components_with::<T, R>` methods for `Default` and
custom constructors respectively. These methods exist on `App` and
`World`.
```rust
struct BirdPlugin;
impl Plugin for BirdPlugin {
fn plugin(app: &mut App) {
// Make `Bird` require `Wings` with a `Default` constructor.
app.register_required_components::<Bird, Wings>();
// Make `Wings` require `FlapSpeed` with a custom constructor.
// Fun fact: Some hummingbirds can flutter their wings 80 times per second!
app.register_required_components_with::<Wings, FlapSpeed>(|| FlapSpeed::from_duration(1.0 / 80.0));
}
}
```
The custom constructor is a function pointer to match the `require` API,
though it could take a raw value too.
Requirement inheritance works similarly as with the `require` attribute.
If `Bird` required `FlapSpeed` directly, it would take precedence over
indirectly requiring it through `Wings`. The same logic applies to all
levels of the inheritance tree.
Note that registering the same component requirement more than once will
panic, similarly to trying to add multiple component hooks of the same
type to the same component. This avoids constructor conflicts and
confusing ordering issues.
### Implementation
Runtime requirements have two additional challenges in comparison to the
`require` attribute.
1. The `require` attribute uses recursion and macros with clever
ordering to populate hash maps of required components for each component
type. The expected semantics are that "more specific" requirements
override ones deeper in the inheritance tree. However, at runtime, there
is no representation of how "specific" each requirement is.
2. If you first register the requirement `X -> Y`, and later register `Y
-> Z`, then `X` should also indirectly require `Z`. However, `Y` itself
doesn't know that it is required by `X`, so it's not aware that it
should update the list of required components for `X`.
My solutions to these problems are:
1. Store the depth in the inheritance tree for each entry of a given
component's `RequiredComponents`. This is used to determine how
"specific" each requirement is. For `require`-based registration, these
depths are computed as part of the recursion.
2. Store and maintain a `required_by` list in each component's
`ComponentInfo`, next to `required_components`. For `require`-based
registration, these are also added after each registration, as part of
the recursion.
When calling `register_required_components`, it works as follows:
1. Get the required components of `Foo`, and check that `Bar` isn't
already a *direct* requirement.
3. Register `Bar` as a required component for `Foo`, and add `Foo` to
the `required_by` list for `Bar`.
4. Find and register all indirect requirements inherited from `Bar`,
adding `Foo` to the `required_by` list for each component.
5. Iterate through components that require `Foo`, registering the new
inherited requires for them as indirect requirements.
The runtime registration is likely slightly more expensive than the
`require` version, but it is a one-time cost, and quite negligible in
practice, unless projects have hundreds or thousands of runtime
requirements. I have not benchmarked this however.
This does also add a small amount of extra cost to the `require`
attribute for updating `required_by` lists, but I expect it to be very
minor.
## Testing
I added some tests that are copies of the `require` versions, as well as
some tests that are more specific to the runtime implementation. I might
add a few more tests though.
## Discussion
- Is `register_required_components` a good name? Originally I went for
`register_component_requirement` to be consistent with
`register_component_hooks`, but the general feature is often referred to
as "required components", which is why I changed it to
`register_required_components`.
- Should we *not* panic for duplicate requirements? If so, should they
just be ignored, or should the latest registration overwrite earlier
ones?
- If we do want to panic for duplicate, conflicting registrations,
should we at least not panic if the registrations are *exactly* the
same, i.e. same component and same constructor? The current
implementation panics for all duplicate direct registrations regardless
of the constructor.
## Next Steps
- Allow `register_required_components` to take a `Bundle` instead of a
single required component.
- I could also try to do it in this PR if that would be preferable.
- Not directly related, but archetype invariants?
# Objective
- Fixes#6370
- Closes#6581
## Solution
- Added the following lints to the workspace:
- `std_instead_of_core`
- `std_instead_of_alloc`
- `alloc_instead_of_core`
- Used `cargo +nightly fmt` with [item level use
formatting](https://rust-lang.github.io/rustfmt/?version=v1.6.0&search=#Item%5C%3A)
to split all `use` statements into single items.
- Used `cargo clippy --workspace --all-targets --all-features --fix
--allow-dirty` to _attempt_ to resolve the new linting issues, and
intervened where the lint was unable to resolve the issue automatically
(usually due to needing an `extern crate alloc;` statement in a crate
root).
- Manually removed certain uses of `std` where negative feature gating
prevented `--all-features` from finding the offending uses.
- Used `cargo +nightly fmt` with [crate level use
formatting](https://rust-lang.github.io/rustfmt/?version=v1.6.0&search=#Crate%5C%3A)
to re-merge all `use` statements matching Bevy's previous styling.
- Manually fixed cases where the `fmt` tool could not re-merge `use`
statements due to conditional compilation attributes.
## Testing
- Ran CI locally
## Migration Guide
The MSRV is now 1.81. Please update to this version or higher.
## Notes
- This is a _massive_ change to try and push through, which is why I've
outlined the semi-automatic steps I used to create this PR, in case this
fails and someone else tries again in the future.
- Making this change has no impact on user code, but does mean Bevy
contributors will be warned to use `core` and `alloc` instead of `std`
where possible.
- This lint is a critical first step towards investigating `no_std`
options for Bevy.
---------
Co-authored-by: François Mockers <francois.mockers@vleue.com>
# Objective
- Fixes#14924
- Closes#9584
## Solution
- We introduce a new trait, `SystemInput`, that serves as a type
function from the `'static` form of the input, to its lifetime'd
version, similarly to `SystemParam` or `WorldQuery`.
- System functions now take the lifetime'd wrapped version,
`SystemInput::Param<'_>`, which prevents the issue presented in #14924
(i.e. `InRef<T>`).
- Functions for running systems now take the lifetime'd unwrapped
version, `SystemInput::Inner<'_>` (i.e. `&T`).
- Due to the above change, system piping had to be re-implemented as a
standalone type, rather than `CombinatorSystem` as it was previously.
- Removes the `Trigger<'static, E, B>` transmute in observer runner
code.
## Testing
- All current tests pass.
- Added additional tests and doc-tests.
---
## Showcase
```rust
let mut world = World::new();
let mut value = 2;
// Currently possible:
fn square(In(input): In<usize>) -> usize {
input * input
}
value = world.run_system_once_with(value, square);
// Now possible:
fn square_mut(InMut(input): InMut<usize>) {
*input *= *input;
}
world.run_system_once_with(&mut value, square_mut);
// Or:
fn square_ref(InRef(input): InRef<usize>) -> usize {
*input * *input
}
value = world.run_system_once_with(&value, square_ref);
```
## Migration Guide
- All current explicit usages of the following types must be changed in
the way specified:
- `SystemId<I, O>` to `SystemId<In<I>, O>`
- `System<In = T>` to `System<In = In<T>>`
- `IntoSystem<I, O, M>` to `IntoSystem<In<I>, O, M>`
- `Condition<M, T>` to `Condition<M, In<T>>`
- `In<Trigger<E, B>>` is no longer a valid input parameter type. Use
`Trigger<E, B>` directly, instead.
---------
Co-authored-by: Giacomo Stevanato <giaco.stevanato@gmail.com>
# Objective
> Rust 1.81 released the #[expect(...)] attribute, which works like
#[allow(...)] but throws a warning if the lint isn't raised. This is
preferred to #[allow(...)] because it tells us when it can be removed.
- Adopts the parts of #15118 that are complete, and updates the branch
so it can be merged.
- There were a few conflicts, let me know if I misjudged any of 'em.
Alice's
[recommendation](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/15059#issuecomment-2349263900)
seems well-taken, let's do this crate by crate now that @BD103 has done
the lion's share of this!
(Relates to, but doesn't yet completely finish #15059.)
Crates this _doesn't_ cover:
- bevy_input
- bevy_gilrs
- bevy_window
- bevy_winit
- bevy_state
- bevy_render
- bevy_picking
- bevy_core_pipeline
- bevy_sprite
- bevy_text
- bevy_pbr
- bevy_ui
- bevy_gltf
- bevy_gizmos
- bevy_dev_tools
- bevy_internal
- bevy_dylib
---------
Co-authored-by: BD103 <59022059+BD103@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Ben Frankel <ben.frankel7@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Antony <antony.m.3012@gmail.com>
# Objective
- Crate-level prelude modules, such as `bevy_ecs::prelude`, are plagued
with inconsistency! Let's fix it!
## Solution
Format all preludes based on the following rules:
1. All preludes should have brief documentation in the format of:
> The _name_ prelude.
>
> This includes the most common types in this crate, re-exported for
your convenience.
2. All documentation should be outer, not inner. (`///` instead of
`//!`.)
3. No prelude modules should be annotated with `#[doc(hidden)]`. (Items
within them may, though I'm not sure why this was done.)
## Testing
- I manually searched for the term `mod prelude` and updated all
occurrences by hand. 🫠
---------
Co-authored-by: Gino Valente <49806985+MrGVSV@users.noreply.github.com>
# Objective
As discussed in https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/7386, system
order ambiguities within `DefaultPlugins` are a source of bugs in the
engine and badly pollute diagnostic output for users.
We should eliminate them!
This PR is an alternative to #15027: with all external ambiguities
silenced, this should be much less prone to merge conflicts and the test
output should be much easier for authors to understand.
Note that system order ambiguities are still permitted in the
`RenderApp`: these need a bit of thought in terms of how to test them,
and will be fairly involved to fix. While these aren't *good*, they'll
generally only cause graphical bugs, not logic ones.
## Solution
All remaining system order ambiguities have been resolved.
Review this PR commit-by-commit to see how each of these problems were
fixed.
## Testing
`cargo run --example ambiguity_detection` passes with no panics or
logging!
# Objective
- Fixes#14974
## Solution
- Replace all* instances of `NonZero*` with `NonZero<*>`
## Testing
- CI passed locally.
---
## Notes
Within the `bevy_reflect` implementations for `std` types,
`impl_reflect_value!()` will continue to use the type aliases instead,
as it inappropriately parses the concrete type parameter as a generic
argument. If the `ZeroablePrimitive` trait was stable, or the macro
could be modified to accept a finite list of types, then we could fully
migrate.
# Objective
- Fixes#14658.
## Solution
- Added `on_unimplemented` Diagnostic for `IntoObserverSystem` calling
out argument ordering in a `note`
- Added an example to the documentation on `App::observe` to provide
some explanation to users.
## Testing
- Ran CI locally
- Deliberately introduced a parameter order error in the
`ecs/observers.rs` example as a test.
---
## Showcase
<details>
<summary>Error Before</summary>
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `{closure@examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13: 22:37}: IntoObserverSystem<_, _, _>` is not satisfied
--> examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13
|
18 | .observe(
| ------- required by a bound introduced by this call
19 | / |mines: Query<&Mine>,
20 | | trigger: Trigger<ExplodeMines>,
21 | | index: Res<SpatialIndex>,
22 | | mut commands: Commands| {
... |
34 | | }
35 | | },
| |_____________^ the trait `bevy::prelude::IntoSystem<bevy::prelude::Trigger<'static, _, _>, (), _>` is not implemented for closure `{closure@examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13: 22:37}`, which is required by `{closure@examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13: 22:37}: IntoObserverSystem<_, _, _>`
|
= note: required for `{closure@examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13: 22:37}` to implement `IntoObserverSystem<_, _, _>`
note: required by a bound in `bevy::prelude::App::observe`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_app\src\app.rs:995:24
|
993 | pub fn observe<E: Event, B: Bundle, M>(
| ------- required by a bound in this associated function
994 | &mut self,
995 | observer: impl IntoObserverSystem<E, B, M>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `App::observe`
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0277`.
error: could not compile `bevy` (example "observers") due to 1 previous error
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error After</summary>
```
error[E0277]: `{closure@examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13: 22:37}` cannot become an `ObserverSystem`
--> examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13
|
18 | .observe(
| ------- required by a bound introduced by this call
19 | / |mines: Query<&Mine>,
20 | | trigger: Trigger<ExplodeMines>,
21 | | index: Res<SpatialIndex>,
22 | | mut commands: Commands| {
... |
34 | | }
35 | | },
| |_____________^ the trait `IntoObserverSystem` is not implemented
|
= help: the trait `bevy::prelude::IntoSystem<bevy::prelude::Trigger<'static, _, _>, (), _>` is not implemented for closure `{closure@examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13: 22:37}`, which is required by `{closure@examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13: 22:37}: IntoObserverSystem<_, _, _>`
= note: for function `ObserverSystem`s, ensure the first argument is a `Trigger<T>` and any subsequent ones are `SystemParam`
= note: required for `{closure@examples/ecs/observers.rs:19:13: 22:37}` to implement `IntoObserverSystem<_, _, _>`
note: required by a bound in `bevy::prelude::App::observe`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_app\src\app.rs:1025:24
|
1023 | pub fn observe<E: Event, B: Bundle, M>(
| ------- required by a bound in this associated function
1024 | &mut self,
1025 | observer: impl IntoObserverSystem<E, B, M>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `App::observe`
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0277`.
error: could not compile `bevy` (example "observers") due to 1 previous error
```
</details>
# Objective
- Fixes#14873, see that issue for a whole lot of context
## Solution
- Add a blessed system set for this stuff. See [this Discord
discussion](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/749335865876021248/1276262931327094908).
Note that the gizmo systems,
[LWIM](https://github.com/Leafwing-Studios/leafwing-input-manager/pull/522/files#diff-9b59ee4899ad0a5d008889ea89a124a7291316532e42f9f3d6ae842b906fb095R154)
and now a new plugin I'm working on are all already ordering against
`run_fixed_main_schedule`, so having a dedicated system set should be
more robust and hopefully also more discoverable.
---
## ~~Showcase~~
~~I can add a little video of a smooth camera later if this gets merged
:)~~
Apparently a release note is not needed, so I'll leave it out. See the
changes in the fixed timestep example for usage showcase and the video
in #14873 for a more or less accurate video of the effect (it does not
use the same solution though, so it is not quite the same)
## Migration Guide
[run_fixed_main_schedule](https://docs.rs/bevy/latest/bevy/time/fn.run_fixed_main_schedule.html)
is no longer public. If you used to order against it, use the new
dedicated `RunFixedMainLoopSystem` system set instead. You can replace
your usage of `run_fixed_main_schedule` one for one by
`RunFixedMainLoopSystem::FixedMainLoop`, but it is now more idiomatic to
place your systems in either
`RunFixedMainLoopSystem::BeforeFixedMainLoop` or
`RunFixedMainLoopSystem::AfterFixedMainLoop`
Old:
```rust
app.add_systems(
RunFixedMainLoop,
some_system.before(run_fixed_main_schedule)
);
```
New:
```rust
app.add_systems(
RunFixedMainLoop,
some_system.in_set(RunFixedMainLoopSystem::BeforeFixedMainLoop)
);
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Tau Gärtli <git@tau.garden>
# Objective
Fixes#14782
## Solution
Enable the lint and fix all upcoming hints (`--fix`). Also tried to
figure out the false-positive (see review comment). Maybe split this PR
up into multiple parts where only the last one enables the lint, so some
can already be merged resulting in less many files touched / less
potential for merge conflicts?
Currently, there are some cases where it might be easier to read the
code with the qualifier, so perhaps remove the import of it and adapt
its cases? In the current stage it's just a plain adoption of the
suggestions in order to have a base to discuss.
## Testing
`cargo clippy` and `cargo run -p ci` are happy.
# Objective
One of the changes in #14704 made `DynamicFunction` effectively the same
as `DynamicClosure<'static>`. This change meant that the de facto
function type would likely be `DynamicClosure<'static>` instead of the
intended `DynamicFunction`, since the former is much more flexible.
We _could_ explore ways of making `DynamicFunction` implement `Copy`
using some unsafe code, but it likely wouldn't be worth it. And users
would likely still reach for the convenience of
`DynamicClosure<'static>` over the copy-ability of `DynamicFunction`.
The goal of this PR is to fix this confusion between the two types.
## Solution
Firstly, the `DynamicFunction` type was removed. Again, it was no
different than `DynamicClosure<'static>` so it wasn't a huge deal to
remove.
Secondly, `DynamicClosure<'env>` and `DynamicClosureMut<'env>` were
renamed to `DynamicFunction<'env>` and `DynamicFunctionMut<'env>`,
respectively.
Yes, we still ultimately kept the naming of `DynamicFunction`, but
changed its behavior to that of `DynamicClosure<'env>`. We need a term
to refer to both functions and closures, and "function" was the best
option.
[Originally](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1002362493634629796/1274091992162242710),
I was going to go with "callable" as the replacement term to encompass
both functions and closures (e.g. `DynamciCallable<'env>`). However, it
was
[suggested](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1002362493634629796/1274653581777047625)
by @SkiFire13 that the simpler "function" term could be used instead.
While "callable" is perhaps the better umbrella term—being truly
ambiguous over functions and closures— "function" is more familiar, used
more often, easier to discover, and is subjectively just
"better-sounding".
## Testing
Most changes are purely swapping type names or updating documentation,
but you can verify everything still works by running the following
command:
```
cargo test --package bevy_reflect
```
# Objective
#14098 added the `FunctionRegistry` for registering functions such that
they can be retrieved by name and used dynamically. One thing we chose
to leave out in that initial PR is support for closures.
Why support closures? Mainly, we don't want to prohibit users from
injecting environmental data into their registered functions. This
allows these functions to not leak their internals to the public API.
For example, let's say we're writing a library crate that allows users
to register callbacks for certain actions. We want to perform some
actions before invoking the user's callback so we can't just call it
directly. We need a closure for this:
```rust
registry.register("my_lib::onclick", move |event: ClickEvent| {
// ...other work...
user_onclick.call(event); // <-- Captured variable
});
```
We could have made our callback take a reference to the user's callback.
This would remove the need for the closure, but it would change our
desired API to place the burden of fetching the correct callback on the
caller.
## Solution
Modify the `FunctionRegistry` to store registered functions as
`DynamicClosure<'static>` instead of `DynamicFunction` (now using
`IntoClosure` instead of `IntoFunction`).
Due to limitations in Rust and how function reflection works,
`DynamicClosure<'static>` is functionally equivalent to
`DynamicFunction`. And a normal function is considered a subset of
closures (it's a closure that doesn't capture anything), so there
shouldn't be any difference in usage: all functions that satisfy
`IntoFunction` should satisfy `IntoClosure`.
This means that the registration API introduced in #14098 should require
little-to-no changes on anyone following `main`.
### Closures vs Functions
One consideration here is whether we should keep closures and functions
separate.
This PR unifies them into `DynamicClosure<'static>`, but we can consider
splitting them up. The reasons we might want to do so are:
- Simplifies mental model and terminology (users don't have to
understand that functions turn into closures)
- If Rust ever improves its function model, we may be able to add
additional guarantees to `DynamicFunction` that make it useful to
separate the two
- Adding support for generic functions may be less confusing for users
since closures in Rust technically can't be generic
The reasons behind this PR's unification approach are:
- Reduces the number of methods needed on `FunctionRegistry`
- Reduces the number of lookups a user may have to perform (i.e.
"`get_function` or else `get_closure`")
- Establishes `DynamicClosure<'static>` as the de facto dynamic callable
(similar to how most APIs in Rust code tend to prefer `impl Fn() ->
String` over `fn() -> String`)
I'd love to hear feedback on this matter, and whether we should continue
with this PR's approach or switch to a split model.
## Testing
You can test locally by running:
```
cargo test --package bevy_reflect
```
---
## Showcase
Closures can now be registered into the `FunctionRegistry`:
```rust
let punct = String::from("!!!");
registry.register_with_name("my_crate::punctuate", move |text: String| {
format!("{}{}", text, punct)
});
```
# Objective
### TL;DR
#14098 added the `FunctionRegistry` but had some last minute
complications due to anonymous functions. It ended up going with a
"required name" approach to ensure anonymous functions would always have
a name.
However, this approach isn't ideal for named functions since, by
definition, they will always have a name.
Therefore, this PR aims to modify function reflection such that we can
make function registration easier for named functions, while still
allowing anonymous functions to be registered as well.
### Context
Function registration (#14098) ran into a little problem: anonymous
functions.
Anonymous functions, including function pointers, have very non-unique
type names. For example, the anonymous function `|a: i32, b: i32| a + b`
has the type name of `fn(i32, i32) -> i32`. This obviously means we'd
conflict with another function like `|a: i32, b: i32| a - b`.
The solution that #14098 landed on was to always require a name during
function registration.
The downside with this is that named functions (e.g. `fn add(a: i32, b:
i32) -> i32 { a + b }`) had to redundantly provide a name. Additionally,
manually constructed `DynamicFunction`s also ran into this ergonomics
issue.
I don't entirely know how the function registry will be used, but I have
a strong suspicion that most of its registrations will either be named
functions or manually constructed `DynamicFunction`s, with anonymous
functions only being used here and there for quick prototyping or adding
small functionality.
Why then should the API prioritize the anonymous function use case by
always requiring a name during registration?
#### Telling Functions Apart
Rust doesn't provide a lot of out-of-the-box tools for reflecting
functions. One of the biggest hurdles in attempting to solve the problem
outlined above would be to somehow tell the different kinds of functions
apart.
Let's briefly recap on the categories of functions in Rust:
| Category | Example |
| ------------------ | ----------------------------------------- |
| Named function | `fn add(a: i32, b: i32) -> i32 { a + b }` |
| Closure | `\|a: i32\| a + captured_variable` |
| Anonymous function | `\|a: i32, b: i32\| a + b` |
| Function pointer | `fn(i32, i32) -> i32` |
My first thought was to try and differentiate these categories based on
their size. However, we can see that this doesn't quite work:
| Category | `size_of` |
| ------------------ | --------- |
| Named function | 0 |
| Closure | 0+ |
| Anonymous function | 0 |
| Function pointer | 8 |
Not only does this not tell anonymous functions from named ones, but it
struggles with pretty much all of them.
My second then was to differentiate based on type name:
| Category | `type_name` |
| ------------------ | ----------------------- |
| Named function | `foo::bar::baz` |
| Closure | `foo::bar::{{closure}}` |
| Anonymous function | `fn() -> String` |
| Function pointer | `fn() -> String` |
This is much better. While it can't distinguish between function
pointers and anonymous functions, this doesn't matter too much since we
only care about whether we can _name_ the function.
So why didn't we implement this in #14098?
#### Relying on `type_name`
While this solution was known about while working on #14098, it was left
out from that PR due to it being potentially controversial.
The [docs](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/any/fn.type_name.html)
for `std::any::type_name` state:
> The returned string must not be considered to be a unique identifier
of a type as multiple types may map to the same type name. Similarly,
there is no guarantee that all parts of a type will appear in the
returned string: for example, lifetime specifiers are currently not
included. In addition, the output may change between versions of the
compiler.
So that's it then? We can't use `type_name`?
Well, this statement isn't so much a rule as it is a guideline. And Bevy
is no stranger to bending the rules to make things work or to improve
ergonomics. Remember that before `TypePath`, Bevy's scene system was
entirely dependent on `type_name`. Not to mention that `type_name` is
being used as a key into both the `TypeRegistry` and the
`FunctionRegistry`.
Bevy's practices aside, can we reliably use `type_name` for this?
My answer would be "yes".
Anonymous functions are anonymous. They have no name. There's nothing
Rust could do to give them a name apart from generating a random string
of characters. But remember that this is a diagnostic tool, it doesn't
make sense to obfuscate the type by randomizing the output. So changing
it to be anything other than what it is now is very unlikely.
The only changes that I could potentially see happening are:
1. Closures replace `{{closure}}` with the name of their variable
2. Lifetimes are included in the output
I don't think the first is likely to happen, but if it does then it
actually works out in our favor: closures are now named!
The second point is probably the likeliest. However, adding lifetimes
doesn't mean we can't still rely on `type_name` to determine whether or
not a function is named. So we should be okay in this case as well.
## Solution
Parse the `type_name` of the function in the `TypedFunction` impl to
determine if the function is named or anonymous.
This once again makes `FunctionInfo::name` optional. For manual
constructions of `DynamicFunction`, `FunctionInfo::named` or
``FunctionInfo::anonymous` can be used.
The `FunctionRegistry` API has also been reworked to account for this
change.
`FunctionRegistry::register` no longer takes a name and instead takes it
from the supplied function, returning a
`FunctionRegistrationError::MissingName` error if the name is `None`.
This also doubles as a replacement for the old
`FunctionRegistry::register_dynamic` method, which has been removed.
To handle anonymous functions, a `FunctionRegistry::register_with_name`
method has been added. This works in the same way
`FunctionRegistry::register` used to work before this PR.
The overwriting methods have been updated in a similar manner, with
modifications to `FunctionRegistry::overwrite_registration`, the removal
of `FunctionRegistry::overwrite_registration_dynamic`, and the addition
of `FunctionRegistry::overwrite_registration_with_name`.
This PR also updates the methods on `App` in a similar way:
`App::register_function` no longer requires a name argument and
`App::register_function_with_name` has been added to handle anonymous
functions (and eventually closures).
## Testing
You can run the tests locally by running:
```
cargo test --package bevy_reflect --features functions
```
---
## Internal Migration Guide
> [!important]
> Function reflection was introduced as part of the 0.15 dev cycle. This
migration guide was written for developers relying on `main` during this
cycle, and is not a breaking change coming from 0.14.
> [!note]
> This list is not exhaustive. It only contains some of the most
important changes.
`FunctionRegistry::register` no longer requires a name string for named
functions. Anonymous functions, however, need to be registered using
`FunctionRegistry::register_with_name`.
```rust
// BEFORE
registry
.register(std::any::type_name_of_val(&foo), foo)?
.register("bar", || println!("Hello world!"));
// AFTER
registry
.register(foo)?
.register_with_name("bar", || println!("Hello world!"));
```
`FunctionInfo::name` is now optional. Anonymous functions and closures
will now have their name set to `None` by default. Additionally,
`FunctionInfo::new` has been renamed to `FunctionInfo::named`.
# Objective
When looking at documentation for the `Update` schedule, its not
entirely obvious that developers should actually be using the
`FixedUpdate` schedule for most of their game logic. We should directly
cross-link between the two, and give examples of which systems to put in
which schedules.
## Solution
Do just that.
# Objective
#13152 added support for reflecting functions. Now, we need a way to
register those functions such that they may be accessed anywhere within
the ECS.
## Solution
Added a `FunctionRegistry` type similar to `TypeRegistry`.
This allows a function to be registered and retrieved by name.
```rust
fn foo() -> i32 {
123
}
let mut registry = FunctionRegistry::default();
registry.register("my_function", foo);
let function = registry.get_mut("my_function").unwrap();
let value = function.call(ArgList::new()).unwrap().unwrap_owned();
assert_eq!(value.downcast_ref::<i32>(), Some(&123));
```
Additionally, I added an `AppFunctionRegistry` resource which wraps a
`FunctionRegistryArc`. Functions can be registered into this resource
using `App::register_function` or by getting a mutable reference to the
resource itself.
### Limitations
#### `Send + Sync`
In order to get this registry to work across threads, it needs to be
`Send + Sync`. This means that `DynamicFunction` needs to be `Send +
Sync`, which means that its internal function also needs to be `Send +
Sync`.
In most cases, this won't be an issue because standard Rust functions
(the type most likely to be registered) are always `Send + Sync`.
Additionally, closures tend to be `Send + Sync` as well, granted they
don't capture any `!Send` or `!Sync` variables.
This PR adds this `Send + Sync` requirement, but as mentioned above, it
hopefully shouldn't be too big of an issue.
#### Closures
Unfortunately, closures can't be registered yet. This will likely be
explored and added in a followup PR.
### Future Work
Besides addressing the limitations listed above, another thing we could
look into is improving the lookup of registered functions. One aspect is
in the performance of hashing strings. The other is in the developer
experience of having to call `std::any::type_name_of_val` to get the
name of their function (assuming they didn't give it a custom name).
## Testing
You can run the tests locally with:
```
cargo test --package bevy_reflect
```
---
## Changelog
- Added `FunctionRegistry`
- Added `AppFunctionRegistry` (a `Resource` available from `bevy_ecs`)
- Added `FunctionRegistryArc`
- Added `FunctionRegistrationError`
- Added `reflect_functions` feature to `bevy_ecs` and `bevy_app`
- `FunctionInfo` is no longer `Default`
- `DynamicFunction` now requires its wrapped function be `Send + Sync`
## Internal Migration Guide
> [!important]
> Function reflection was introduced as part of the 0.15 dev cycle. This
migration guide was written for developers relying on `main` during this
cycle, and is not a breaking change coming from 0.14.
`DynamicFunction` (both those created manually and those created with
`IntoFunction`), now require `Send + Sync`. All standard Rust functions
should meet that requirement. Closures, on the other hand, may not if
they capture any `!Send` or `!Sync` variables from its environment.
# Objective
- Dynamic plugins were deprecated in #13080 due to being unsound. The
plan was to deprecate them in 0.14 and remove them in 0.15.
## Solution
- Remove all dynamic plugin functionality.
- Update documentation to reflect this change.
---
## Migration Guide
Dynamic plugins were deprecated in 0.14 for being unsound, and they have
now been fully removed. Please consider using the alternatives listed in
the `bevy_dynamic_plugin` crate documentation, or worst-case scenario
you may copy the code from 0.14.
# Objective
- Fix issue #2611
## Solution
- Add `--generate-link-to-definition` to all the `rustdoc-args` arrays
in the `Cargo.toml`s (for docs.rs)
- Add `--generate-link-to-definition` to the `RUSTDOCFLAGS` environment
variable in the docs workflow (for dev-docs.bevyengine.org)
- Document all the workspace crates in the docs workflow (needed because
otherwise only the source code of the `bevy` package will be included,
making the argument useless)
- I think this also fixes#3662, since it fixes the bug on
dev-docs.bevyengine.org, while on docs.rs it has been fixed for a while
on their side.
---
## Changelog
- The source code viewer on docs.rs now includes links to the
definitions.
# Objective
```rust
// Currently:
builder.add_after::<FooPlugin, _>(BarPlugin);
// After this PR:
builder.add_after::<FooPlugin>(BarPlugin);
```
This removes some weirdness and better parallels the rest of the
`PluginGroupBuilder` API.
## Solution
Define a helper method `type_id_of_val` to use in `.add_before` and
`.add_after` instead of `TypeId::of::<T>` (which requires the plugin
type to be nameable, preventing `impl Plugin` from being used).
## Testing
Ran `cargo run -p ci lints` successfully.
## Migration Guide
Removed second generic from `PluginGroupBuilder` methods: `add_before`
and `add_after`.
```rust
// Before:
DefaultPlugins
.build()
.add_before::<WindowPlugin, _>(FooPlugin)
.add_after::<WindowPlugin, _>(BarPlugin)
// After:
DefaultPlugins
.build()
.add_before::<WindowPlugin>(FooPlugin)
.add_after::<WindowPlugin>(BarPlugin)
```
---------
Co-authored-by: BD103 <59022059+BD103@users.noreply.github.com>
# Objective
- Bevy currently has lot of invalid intra-doc links, let's fix them!
- Also make CI test them, to avoid future regressions.
- Helps with #1983 (but doesn't fix it, as there could still be explicit
links to docs.rs that are broken)
## Solution
- Make `cargo r -p ci -- doc-check` check fail on warnings (could also
be changed to just some specific lints)
- Manually fix all the warnings (note that in some cases it was unclear
to me what the fix should have been, I'll try to highlight them in a
self-review)
# Objective
- Often in games you will want to create chains of systems that modify
some event. For example, a chain of damage systems that handle a
DamageEvent and modify the underlying value before the health system
finally consumes the event. Right now this requires either:
* Using a component added to the entity
* Consuming and refiring events
Neither is ideal when really all we want to do is read the events value,
modify it, and write it back.
## Solution
- Create an EventMutator class similar to EventReader but with ResMut<T>
and iterators that return &mut so that events can be mutated.
## Testing
- I replicated all the existing tests for EventReader to make sure
behavior was the same (I believe) and added a number of tests specific
to testing that 1) events can actually be mutated, and that 2)
EventReader sees changes from EventMutator for events it hasn't already
seen.
## Migration Guide
Users currently using `ManualEventReader` should use `EventCursor`
instead. `ManualEventReader` will be removed in Bevy 0.16. Additionally,
`Events::get_reader` has been replaced by `Events::get_cursor`.
Users currently directly accessing the `Events` resource for mutation
should move to `EventMutator` if possible.
---------
Co-authored-by: poopy <gonesbird@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Bump version after release
This PR has been auto-generated
Co-authored-by: Bevy Auto Releaser <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: François Mockers <mockersf@gmail.com>
# Objective
Fixes#13995.
## Solution
Override the default `Ctrl+C` handler with one that sends `AppExit`
event to every app with `TerminalCtrlCHandlerPlugin`.
## Testing
Tested by running the `3d_scene` example and hitting `Ctrl+C` in the
terminal.
---
## Changelog
Handles `Ctrl+C` in the terminal gracefully.
## Migration Guide
If you are overriding the `Ctrl+C` handler then you should call
`TerminalCtrlCHandlerPlugin::gracefully_exit` from your handler. It will
tell the app to exit.
# Objective
- Fixes https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/14003
## Solution
- Expose an API to perform updates for a specific sub-app, so we can
avoid mutable borrow the app twice.
## Testing
- I have tested the API by modifying the code in the `many_lights`
example with the following changes:
```rust
impl Plugin for LogVisibleLights {
fn build(&self, app: &mut App) {
let Some(render_app) = app.get_sub_app_mut(RenderApp) else {
return;
};
render_app.add_systems(Render, print_visible_light_count.in_set(RenderSet::Prepare));
}
fn finish(&self, app: &mut App) {
app.update_sub_app_by_label(RenderApp);
}
}
```
---
## Changelog
- add the `update_sub_app_by_label` API to `App` and `SubApps`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jan Hohenheim <jan@hohenheim.ch>
# Objective
Fixes#13866
## Solution
Add `insert_before` in **FixedMainScheduleOrder** and
**MainScheduleOrder**, add `insert_startup_before` in
**MainScheduleOrder**, applying the same logic as `insert_after`, except
for parameters naming and insertion index.
# Objective
- Provide an expressive way to register dynamic behavior in response to
ECS changes that is consistent with existing bevy types and traits as to
provide a smooth user experience.
- Provide a mechanism for immediate changes in response to events during
command application in order to facilitate improved query caching on the
path to relations.
## Solution
- A new fundamental ECS construct, the `Observer`; inspired by flec's
observers but adapted to better fit bevy's access patterns and rust's
type system.
---
## Examples
There are 3 main ways to register observers. The first is a "component
observer" that looks like this:
```rust
world.observe(|trigger: Trigger<OnAdd, Transform>, query: Query<&Transform>| {
let transform = query.get(trigger.entity()).unwrap();
});
```
The above code will spawn a new entity representing the observer that
will run it's callback whenever the `Transform` component is added to an
entity. This is a system-like function that supports dependency
injection for all the standard bevy types: `Query`, `Res`, `Commands`
etc. It also has a `Trigger` parameter that provides information about
the trigger such as the target entity, and the event being triggered.
Importantly these systems run during command application which is key
for their future use to keep ECS internals up to date. There are similar
events for `OnInsert` and `OnRemove`, and this will be expanded with
things such as `ArchetypeCreated`, `TableEmpty` etc. in follow up PRs.
Another way to register an observer is an "entity observer" that looks
like this:
```rust
world.entity_mut(entity).observe(|trigger: Trigger<Resize>| {
// ...
});
```
Entity observers run whenever an event of their type is triggered
targeting that specific entity. This type of observer will de-spawn
itself if the entity (or entities) it is observing is ever de-spawned so
as to not leave dangling observers.
Entity observers can also be spawned from deferred contexts such as
other observers, systems, or hooks using commands:
```rust
commands.entity(entity).observe(|trigger: Trigger<Resize>| {
// ...
});
```
Observers are not limited to in built event types, they can be used with
any type that implements `Event` (which has been extended to implement
Component). This means events can also carry data:
```rust
#[derive(Event)]
struct Resize { x: u32, y: u32 }
commands.entity(entity).observe(|trigger: Trigger<Resize>, query: Query<&mut Size>| {
let event = trigger.event();
// ...
});
// Will trigger the observer when commands are applied.
commands.trigger_targets(Resize { x: 10, y: 10 }, entity);
```
You can also trigger events that target more than one entity at a time:
```rust
commands.trigger_targets(Resize { x: 10, y: 10 }, [e1, e2]);
```
Additionally, Observers don't _need_ entity targets:
```rust
app.observe(|trigger: Trigger<Quit>| {
})
commands.trigger(Quit);
```
In these cases, `trigger.entity()` will be a placeholder.
Observers are actually just normal entities with an `ObserverState` and
`Observer` component! The `observe()` functions above are just shorthand
for:
```rust
world.spawn(Observer::new(|trigger: Trigger<Resize>| {});
```
This will spawn the `Observer` system and use an `on_add` hook to add
the `ObserverState` component.
Dynamic components and trigger types are also fully supported allowing
for runtime defined trigger types.
## Possible Follow-ups
1. Deprecate `RemovedComponents`, observers should fulfill all use cases
while being more flexible and performant.
2. Queries as entities: Swap queries to entities and begin using
observers listening to archetype creation triggers to keep their caches
in sync, this allows unification of `ObserverState` and `QueryState` as
well as unlocking several API improvements for `Query` and the
management of `QueryState`.
3. Trigger bubbling: For some UI use cases in particular users are
likely to want some form of bubbling for entity observers, this is
trivial to implement naively but ideally this includes an acceleration
structure to cache hierarchy traversals.
4. All kinds of other in-built trigger types.
5. Optimization; in order to not bloat the complexity of the PR I have
kept the implementation straightforward, there are several areas where
performance can be improved. The focus for this PR is to get the
behavior implemented and not incur a performance cost for users who
don't use observers.
I am leaving each of these to follow up PR's in order to keep each of
them reviewable as this already includes significant changes.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: MiniaczQ <xnetroidpl@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
Fixes#13815
## Solution
Move insertion of the plugin name to after build is called.
## Testing
I added a regression test
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: François Mockers <mockersf@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: François Mockers <francois.mockers@vleue.com>
# Objective
As discovered in
https://github.com/Leafwing-Studios/leafwing-input-manager/issues/538,
there appears to be some real weirdness going on in how event updates
are processed between Bevy 0.13 and Bevy 0.14.
To identify the cause and prevent regression, I've added tests to
validate the intended behavior.
My initial suspicion was that this would be fixed by
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/13762, but that doesn't seem to
be the case.
Instead, events appear to never be updated at all when using `bevy_app`
by itself. This is part of the problem resolved by
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/11528, and introduced by
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/10077.
After some investigation, it appears that `signal_event_update_system`
is never added using a bare-bones `App`, and so event updates are always
skipped.
This can be worked around by adding your own copy to a
later-in-the-frame schedule, but that's not a very good fix.
## Solution
Ensure that if we're not using a `FixedUpdate` schedule, events are
always updated every frame.
To do this, I've modified the logic of `event_update_condition` and
`event_update_system` to clearly and correctly differentiate between the
two cases: where we're waiting for a "you should update now" signal and
where we simply don't care.
To encode this, I've added the `ShouldUpdateEvents` enum, replacing a
simple `bool` in `EventRegistry`'s `needs_update` field.
Now, both tests pass as expected, without having to manually add a
system!
## Testing
I've written two parallel unit tests to cover the intended behavior:
1. Test that `iter_current_update_events` works as expected in
`bevy_ecs`.
2. Test that `iter_current_update_events` works as expected in
`bevy_app`
I've also added a test to verify that event updating works correctly in
the presence of a fixed main schedule, and a second test to verify that
fixed updating works at all to help future authors narrow down failures.
## Outstanding
- [x] figure out why the `bevy_app` version of this test fails but the
`bevy_ecs` version does not
- [x] figure out why `EventRegistry::run_updates` isn't working properly
- [x] figure out why `EventRegistry::run_updates` is never getting
called
- [x] figure out why `event_update_condition` is always returning false
- [x] figure out why `EventRegistry::needs_update` is always false
- [x] verify that the problem is a missing `signal_events_update_system`
---------
Co-authored-by: Mike <mike.hsu@gmail.com>
Fixes#13758.
# Objective
Calling `update` on the main app already calls `clear_trackers`. Calling
it again in `SubApps::update` caused RemovedCompenet Events to be
cleared earlier than they should be.
## Solution
- Don't call clear_trackers an extra time.
## Testing
I manually tested the fix with this unit test:
```
#[cfg(test)]
mod test {
use crate::core::{FrameCount, FrameCountPlugin};
use crate::prelude::*;
#[test]
fn test_next_frame_removal() {
#[derive(Component)]
struct Foo;
#[derive(Resource)]
struct RemovedCount(usize);
let mut app = App::new();
app.add_plugins(FrameCountPlugin);
app.add_systems(Startup, |mut commands: Commands| {
for _ in 0..100 {
commands.spawn(Foo);
}
commands.insert_resource(RemovedCount(0));
});
app.add_systems(First, |counter: Res<FrameCount>| {
println!("Frame {}:", counter.0)
});
fn detector_system(
mut removals: RemovedComponents<Foo>,
foos: Query<Entity, With<Foo>>,
mut removed_c: ResMut<RemovedCount>,
) {
for e in removals.read() {
println!(" Detected removed Foo component for {e:?}");
removed_c.0 += 1;
}
let c = foos.iter().count();
println!(" Total Foos: {}", c);
assert_eq!(c + removed_c.0, 100);
}
fn deleter_system(foos: Query<Entity, With<Foo>>, mut commands: Commands) {
foos.iter().next().map(|e| {
commands.entity(e).remove::<Foo>();
});
}
app.add_systems(Update, (detector_system, deleter_system).chain());
app.update();
app.update();
app.update();
app.update();
}
}
```
# Objective
There were some issues with the `serialize` feature:
- `bevy_app` had a `serialize` feature and a dependency on `serde` even
there is no usage of serde at all inside `bevy_app`
- the `bevy_app/serialize` feature enabled `bevy_ecs/serde`, which is
strange
- `bevy_internal/serialize` did not enable `bevy_app/serialize` so there
was no way of serializing an Entity in bevy 0.14
## Solution
- Remove `serde` and `bevy_app/serialize`
- Add a `serialize` flag on `bevy_ecs` that enables `serde`
- ` bevy_internal/serialize` now enables `bevy_ecs/serialize`
The documentation for the `State` resource still referenced the use of
`apply_state_transition` to manually force a state transition to occur,
and the question around how to force transitions had come up a few times
on discord.
This is a docs-only change, that does the following:
- Properly references `StateTransition` in the `MainSchedule` docs
- replace the explanations for applying `NextState` with ones that
explain the `StateTransition` schedule, and mentions the possibility of
calling it manually
- Add an example of calling `StateTransition` manually in the docs for
the state transition schedule itself.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
# Objective
- Let `init_non_send_resource` take `FromWorld` values again, not only
`Default`
- This reverts an unintended breaking change introduced in #9202
## Solution
- The resource initialized with `init_non_send_resource` requires
`FromWorld` again
# Objective
The default app runner fabricates exit codes loosing useful info in the
process.
## Solution
- Make run_once extract the correct exit code from app.
- Add a test to confirm it works.
## Testing
- Run the `runner_returns_correct_exit_code` test.
- Rejoice when it succeeds.
# Objective
After separating `bevy_states`, state installation methods like
`init_state` were kept in `bevy_app` under the `bevy_state` feature
flag.
This is problematic, because `bevy_state` is not a core module,
`bevy_app` is, yet it depends on `bevy_state`.
This causes practical problems like the inability to use
`bevy_hierarchy` inside `bevy_state`, because of circular dependencies.
## Solution
- `bevy_state` now has a `bevy_app` feature flag, which gates the new
`AppStateExt` trait.
All previous state installation methods were moved to this trait.
It's implemented for both `SubApp` and `App`.
## Changelog
- All state related app methods are now in `AppExtStates` trait in
`bevy_state`.
- Added `StatesPlugin` which is in `DefaultPlugins` when `bevy_state` is
enabled.
## Migration Guide
`App::init_state` is now provided by the
`bevy_state::app::AppExtStates;` trait: import it if you need this
method and are not blob-importing the `bevy` prelude.
# Objective
Prerequisite to #13579.
Make state transition schedule running simpler.
## Solution
- Remove `should_run_transition` which read the latest event and
fake-fire an event for the startup transitions (e.g. startup
`OnEnter()`).
- Account for startup event, by actually emitting an event when adding
states to `App`.
- Replace `should_run_transition` with `last_transition`, which is a
light wrapper over `EventReader::read().last()`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
# Objective
Fix#13530 (just realized creating an issue was unnecessary since it's a
super simple fix)
## Solution
Add a cfg feature attribute
## Testing
Compiles fine now
# Objective
- The current implementation for dynamic plugins is unsound. Please see
#11969 for background and justification.
- Closes#11969 and closes#13073.
## Solution
- Deprecate all dynamic plugin items for Bevy 0.14, with plans to remove
them for Bevy 0.15.
## Discussion
One thing I want to make clear is that I'm not opposed to dynamic
plugins _in general_. I think they can be handy, especially for DLC and
modding, but I think the current system is the wrong approach. It's too
much of a footgun for the meager benefit is provides.
---
## Changelog
- Deprecated the current dynamic plugin system.
- Dynamic plugins will be removed in Bevy 0.15. For now you can continue
using them by marking your code with `#[allow(deprecated)]`.
## Migration Guide
If possible, remove all usage of dynamic plugins.
```rust
// Old
#[derive(DynamicPlugin)]
pub struct MyPlugin;
App::new()
.load_plugin("path/to/plugin")
.run();
// New
pub struct MyPlugin;
App::new()
.add_plugins(MyPlugin)
.run();
```
If you are unable to do that, you may temporarily silence the
deprecation warnings.
```rust
#[allow(deprecated)]
```
Please note that the current dynamic plugin system will be removed by
the next major Bevy release, so you will have to migrate eventually. You
may be interested in these safer alternatives:
- [Bevy Assets - Scripting]: Scripting and modding libraries for Bevy
- [Bevy Assets - Development tools]: Hot reloading and other development
functionality
- [`stabby`]: Stable Rust ABI
[Bevy Assets - Scripting]: https://bevyengine.org/assets/#scripting
[Bevy Assets - Development tools]:
https://bevyengine.org/assets/#development-tools
[`stabby`]: https://github.com/ZettaScaleLabs/stabby
# Objective
- Fixes#12377
## Solution
Added simple `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented(...)]` attributes to some
critical public traits providing a more approachable initial error
message. Where appropriate, a `note` is added indicating that a `derive`
macro is available.
## Examples
<details>
<summary>Examples hidden for brevity</summary>
Below is a collection of examples showing the new error messages
produced by this change. In general, messages will start with a more
Bevy-centric error message (e.g., _`MyComponent` is not a `Component`_),
and a note directing the user to an available derive macro where
appropriate.
### Missing `#[derive(Resource)]`
<details>
<summary>Example Code</summary>
```rust
use bevy::prelude::*;
struct MyResource;
fn main() {
App::new()
.insert_resource(MyResource)
.run();
}
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error Generated</summary>
```error
error[E0277]: `MyResource` is not a `Resource`
--> examples/app/empty.rs:7:26
|
7 | .insert_resource(MyResource)
| --------------- ^^^^^^^^^^ invalid `Resource`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= help: the trait `Resource` is not implemented for `MyResource`
= note: consider annotating `MyResource` with `#[derive(Resource)]`
= help: the following other types implement trait `Resource`:
AccessibilityRequested
ManageAccessibilityUpdates
bevy::bevy_a11y::Focus
DiagnosticsStore
FrameCount
bevy::prelude::State<S>
SystemInfo
bevy::prelude::Axis<T>
and 141 others
note: required by a bound in `bevy::prelude::App::insert_resource`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_app\src\app.rs:419:31
|
419 | pub fn insert_resource<R: Resource>(&mut self, resource: R) -> &mut Self {
| ^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `App::insert_resource`
```
</details>
### Putting A `QueryData` in a `QueryFilter` Slot
<details>
<summary>Example Code</summary>
```rust
use bevy::prelude::*;
#[derive(Component)]
struct A;
#[derive(Component)]
struct B;
fn my_system(_query: Query<&A, &B>) {}
fn main() {
App::new()
.add_systems(Update, my_system)
.run();
}
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error Generated</summary>
```error
error[E0277]: `&B` is not a valid `Query` filter
--> examples/app/empty.rs:9:22
|
9 | fn my_system(_query: Query<&A, &B>) {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ invalid `Query` filter
|
= help: the trait `QueryFilter` is not implemented for `&B`
= help: the following other types implement trait `QueryFilter`:
With<T>
Without<T>
bevy::prelude::Or<()>
bevy::prelude::Or<(F0,)>
bevy::prelude::Or<(F0, F1)>
bevy::prelude::Or<(F0, F1, F2)>
bevy::prelude::Or<(F0, F1, F2, F3)>
bevy::prelude::Or<(F0, F1, F2, F3, F4)>
and 28 others
note: required by a bound in `bevy::prelude::Query`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_ecs\src\system\query.rs:349:51
|
349 | pub struct Query<'world, 'state, D: QueryData, F: QueryFilter = ()> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `Query`
```
</details>
### Missing `#[derive(Component)]`
<details>
<summary>Example Code</summary>
```rust
use bevy::prelude::*;
struct A;
fn my_system(mut commands: Commands) {
commands.spawn(A);
}
fn main() {
App::new()
.add_systems(Startup, my_system)
.run();
}
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error Generated</summary>
```error
error[E0277]: `A` is not a `Bundle`
--> examples/app/empty.rs:6:20
|
6 | commands.spawn(A);
| ----- ^ invalid `Bundle`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= help: the trait `bevy::prelude::Component` is not implemented for `A`, which is required by `A: Bundle`
= note: consider annotating `A` with `#[derive(Component)]` or `#[derive(Bundle)]`
= help: the following other types implement trait `Bundle`:
TransformBundle
SceneBundle
DynamicSceneBundle
AudioSourceBundle<Source>
SpriteBundle
SpriteSheetBundle
Text2dBundle
MaterialMesh2dBundle<M>
and 34 others
= note: required for `A` to implement `Bundle`
note: required by a bound in `bevy::prelude::Commands::<'w, 's>::spawn`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_ecs\src\system\commands\mod.rs:243:21
|
243 | pub fn spawn<T: Bundle>(&mut self, bundle: T) -> EntityCommands {
| ^^^^^^ required by this bound in `Commands::<'w, 's>::spawn`
```
</details>
### Missing `#[derive(Asset)]`
<details>
<summary>Example Code</summary>
```rust
use bevy::prelude::*;
struct A;
fn main() {
App::new()
.init_asset::<A>()
.run();
}
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error Generated</summary>
```error
error[E0277]: `A` is not an `Asset`
--> examples/app/empty.rs:7:23
|
7 | .init_asset::<A>()
| ---------- ^ invalid `Asset`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= help: the trait `Asset` is not implemented for `A`
= note: consider annotating `A` with `#[derive(Asset)]`
= help: the following other types implement trait `Asset`:
Font
AnimationGraph
DynamicScene
Scene
AudioSource
Pitch
bevy::bevy_gltf::Gltf
GltfNode
and 17 others
note: required by a bound in `init_asset`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_asset\src\lib.rs:307:22
|
307 | fn init_asset<A: Asset>(&mut self) -> &mut Self;
| ^^^^^ required by this bound in `AssetApp::init_asset`
```
</details>
### Mismatched Input and Output on System Piping
<details>
<summary>Example Code</summary>
```rust
use bevy::prelude::*;
fn producer() -> u32 {
123
}
fn consumer(_: In<u16>) {}
fn main() {
App::new()
.add_systems(Update, producer.pipe(consumer))
.run();
}
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error Generated</summary>
```error
error[E0277]: `fn(bevy::prelude::In<u16>) {consumer}` is not a valid system with input `u32` and output `_`
--> examples/app/empty.rs:11:44
|
11 | .add_systems(Update, producer.pipe(consumer))
| ---- ^^^^^^^^ invalid system
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= help: the trait `bevy::prelude::IntoSystem<u32, _, _>` is not implemented for fn item `fn(bevy::prelude::In<u16>) {consumer}`
= note: expecting a system which consumes `u32` and produces `_`
note: required by a bound in `pipe`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_ecs\src\system\mod.rs:168:12
|
166 | fn pipe<B, Final, MarkerB>(self, system: B) -> PipeSystem<Self::System, B::System>
| ---- required by a bound in this associated function
167 | where
168 | B: IntoSystem<Out, Final, MarkerB>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `IntoSystem::pipe`
```
</details>
### Missing Reflection
<details>
<summary>Example Code</summary>
```rust
use bevy::prelude::*;
#[derive(Component)]
struct MyComponent;
fn main() {
App::new()
.register_type::<MyComponent>()
.run();
}
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error Generated</summary>
```error
error[E0277]: `MyComponent` does not provide type registration information
--> examples/app/empty.rs:8:26
|
8 | .register_type::<MyComponent>()
| ------------- ^^^^^^^^^^^ the trait `GetTypeRegistration` is not implemented for `MyComponent`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= note: consider annotating `MyComponent` with `#[derive(Reflect)]`
= help: the following other types implement trait `GetTypeRegistration`:
bool
char
isize
i8
i16
i32
i64
i128
and 443 others
note: required by a bound in `bevy::prelude::App::register_type`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_app\src\app.rs:619:29
|
619 | pub fn register_type<T: bevy_reflect::GetTypeRegistration>(&mut self) -> &mut Self {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `App::register_type`
```
</details>
### Missing `#[derive(States)]` Implementation
<details>
<summary>Example Code</summary>
```rust
use bevy::prelude::*;
#[derive(Debug, Clone, Copy, Default, Eq, PartialEq, Hash)]
enum AppState {
#[default]
Menu,
InGame {
paused: bool,
turbo: bool,
},
}
fn main() {
App::new()
.init_state::<AppState>()
.run();
}
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error Generated</summary>
```error
error[E0277]: the trait bound `AppState: FreelyMutableState` is not satisfied
--> examples/app/empty.rs:15:23
|
15 | .init_state::<AppState>()
| ---------- ^^^^^^^^ the trait `FreelyMutableState` is not implemented for `AppState`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= note: consider annotating `AppState` with `#[derive(States)]`
note: required by a bound in `bevy::prelude::App::init_state`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_app\src\app.rs:282:26
|
282 | pub fn init_state<S: FreelyMutableState + FromWorld>(&mut self) -> &mut Self {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `App::init_state`
```
</details>
### Adding a `System` with Unhandled Output
<details>
<summary>Example Code</summary>
```rust
use bevy::prelude::*;
fn producer() -> u32 {
123
}
fn main() {
App::new()
.add_systems(Update, consumer)
.run();
}
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Error Generated</summary>
```error
error[E0277]: `fn() -> u32 {producer}` does not describe a valid system configuration
--> examples/app/empty.rs:9:30
|
9 | .add_systems(Update, producer)
| ----------- ^^^^^^^^ invalid system configuration
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= help: the trait `IntoSystem<(), (), _>` is not implemented for fn item `fn() -> u32 {producer}`, which is required by `fn() -> u32 {producer}: IntoSystemConfigs<_>`
= help: the following other types implement trait `IntoSystemConfigs<Marker>`:
<Box<(dyn bevy::prelude::System<In = (), Out = ()> + 'static)> as IntoSystemConfigs<()>>
<NodeConfigs<Box<(dyn bevy::prelude::System<In = (), Out = ()> + 'static)>> as IntoSystemConfigs<()>>
<(S0,) as IntoSystemConfigs<(SystemConfigTupleMarker, P0)>>
<(S0, S1) as IntoSystemConfigs<(SystemConfigTupleMarker, P0, P1)>>
<(S0, S1, S2) as IntoSystemConfigs<(SystemConfigTupleMarker, P0, P1, P2)>>
<(S0, S1, S2, S3) as IntoSystemConfigs<(SystemConfigTupleMarker, P0, P1, P2, P3)>>
<(S0, S1, S2, S3, S4) as IntoSystemConfigs<(SystemConfigTupleMarker, P0, P1, P2, P3, P4)>>
<(S0, S1, S2, S3, S4, S5) as IntoSystemConfigs<(SystemConfigTupleMarker, P0, P1, P2, P3, P4, P5)>>
and 14 others
= note: required for `fn() -> u32 {producer}` to implement `IntoSystemConfigs<_>`
note: required by a bound in `bevy::prelude::App::add_systems`
--> C:\Users\Zac\Documents\GitHub\bevy\crates\bevy_app\src\app.rs:342:23
|
339 | pub fn add_systems<M>(
| ----------- required by a bound in this associated function
...
342 | systems: impl IntoSystemConfigs<M>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `App::add_systems`
```
</details>
</details>
## Testing
CI passed locally.
## Migration Guide
Upgrade to version 1.78 (or higher) of Rust.
## Future Work
- Currently, hints are not supported in this diagnostic. Ideally,
suggestions like _"consider using ..."_ would be in a hint rather than a
note, but that is the best option for now.
- System chaining and other `all_tuples!(...)`-based traits have bad
error messages due to the slightly different error message format.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jamie Ridding <Themayu@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: BD103 <59022059+BD103@users.noreply.github.com>
# Objective
Extracts the state mechanisms into a new crate called "bevy_state".
This comes with a few goals:
- state wasn't really an inherent machinery of the ecs system, and so
keeping it within bevy_ecs felt forced
- by mixing it in with bevy_ecs, the maintainability of our more robust
state system was significantly compromised
moving state into a new crate makes it easier to encapsulate as it's own
feature, and easier to read and understand since it's no longer a
single, massive file.
## Solution
move the state-related elements from bevy_ecs to a new crate
## Testing
- Did you test these changes? If so, how? all the automated tests
migrated and passed, ran the pre-existing examples without changes to
validate.
---
## Migration Guide
Since bevy_state is now gated behind the `bevy_state` feature, projects
that use state but don't use the `default-features` will need to add
that feature flag.
Since it is no longer part of bevy_ecs, projects that use bevy_ecs
directly will need to manually pull in `bevy_state`, trigger the
StateTransition schedule, and handle any of the elements that bevy_app
currently sets up.
---------
Co-authored-by: Kristoffer Søholm <k.soeholm@gmail.com>
# Objective
Resolves#13185
## Solution
Move the following methods from `sub_app` to the `Schedules` resource,
and use them in the sub app:
- `add_systems`
- `configure_sets`
- `ignore_ambiguity`
Add an `entry(&mut self, label: impl ScheduleLabel) -> &mut Schedule`
method to the `Schedules` resource, which returns a mutable reference to
the schedule associated with the label, and creates one if it doesn't
already exist. (build on top of the `entry(..).or_insert_with(...)`
pattern in `HashMap`.
## Testing
- Did you test these changes? If so, how? Added 4 unit tests to the
`schedule.rs` - one that validates adding a system to an existing
schedule, one that validates adding a system to a new one, one that
validates configuring sets on an existing schedule, and one that
validates configuring sets on a new schedule.
- I didn't add tests for `entry` since the previous 4 tests use
functions that rely on it.
- I didn't test `ignore_ambiguity` since I didn't see examples of it's
use, and am not familiar enough with it to know how to set up a good
test for it. However, it relies on the `entry` method as well, so it
should work just like the other 2 methods.
## Summary/Description
This PR extends states to allow support for a wider variety of state
types and patterns, by providing 3 distinct types of state:
- Standard [`States`] can only be changed by manually setting the
[`NextState<S>`] resource. These states are the baseline on which the
other state types are built, and can be used on their own for many
simple patterns. See the [state
example](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/blob/latest/examples/ecs/state.rs)
for a simple use case - these are the states that existed so far in
Bevy.
- [`SubStates`] are children of other states - they can be changed
manually using [`NextState<S>`], but are removed from the [`World`] if
the source states aren't in the right state. See the [sub_states
example](https://github.com/lee-orr/bevy/blob/derived_state/examples/ecs/sub_states.rs)
for a simple use case based on the derive macro, or read the trait docs
for more complex scenarios.
- [`ComputedStates`] are fully derived from other states - they provide
a [`compute`](ComputedStates::compute) method that takes in the source
states and returns their derived value. They are particularly useful for
situations where a simplified view of the source states is necessary -
such as having an `InAMenu` computed state derived from a source state
that defines multiple distinct menus. See the [computed state
example](https://github.com/lee-orr/bevy/blob/derived_state/examples/ecs/computed_states.rscomputed_states.rs)
to see a sampling of uses for these states.
# Objective
This PR is another attempt at allowing Bevy to better handle complex
state objects in a manner that doesn't rely on strict equality. While my
previous attempts (https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/10088 and
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/9957) relied on complex matching
capacities at the point of adding a system to application, this one
instead relies on deterministically deriving simple states from more
complex ones.
As a result, it does not require any special macros, nor does it change
any other interactions with the state system once you define and add
your derived state. It also maintains a degree of distinction between
`State` and just normal application state - your derivations have to end
up being discreet pre-determined values, meaning there is less of a
risk/temptation to place a significant amount of logic and data within a
given state.
### Addition - Sub States
closes#9942
After some conversation with Maintainers & SMEs, a significant concern
was that people might attempt to use this feature as if it were
sub-states, and find themselves unable to use it appropriately. Since
`ComputedState` is mainly a state matching feature, while `SubStates`
are more of a state mutation related feature - but one that is easy to
add with the help of the machinery introduced by `ComputedState`, it was
added here as well. The relevant discussion is here:
https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1200556329803186316
## Solution
closes#11358
The solution is to create a new type of state - one implementing
`ComputedStates` - which is deterministically tied to one or more other
states. Implementors write a function to transform the source states
into the computed state, and it gets triggered whenever one of the
source states changes.
In addition, we added the `FreelyMutableState` trait , which is
implemented as part of the derive macro for `States`. This allows us to
limit use of `NextState<S>` to states that are actually mutable,
preventing mis-use of `ComputedStates`.
---
## Changelog
- Added `ComputedStates` trait
- Added `FreelyMutableState` trait
- Converted `NextState` resource to an Enum, with `Unchanged` and
`Pending`
- Added `App::add_computed_state::<S: ComputedStates>()`, to allow for
easily adding derived states to an App.
- Moved the `StateTransition` schedule label from `bevy_app` to
`bevy_ecs` - but maintained the export in `bevy_app` for continuity.
- Modified the process for updating states. Instead of just having an
`apply_state_transition` system that can be added anywhere, we now have
a multi-stage process that has to run within the `StateTransition`
label. First, all the state changes are calculated - manual transitions
rely on `apply_state_transition`, while computed transitions run their
computation process before both call `internal_apply_state_transition`
to apply the transition, send out the transition event, trigger
dependent states, and record which exit/transition/enter schedules need
to occur. Once all the states have been updated, the transition
schedules are called - first the exit schedules, then transition
schedules and finally enter schedules.
- Added `SubStates` trait
- Adjusted `apply_state_transition` to be a no-op if the `State<S>`
resource doesn't exist
## Migration Guide
If the user accessed the NextState resource's value directly or created
them from scratch they will need to adjust to use the new enum variants:
- if they created a `NextState(Some(S))` - they should now use
`NextState::Pending(S)`
- if they created a `NextState(None)` -they should now use
`NextState::Unchanged`
- if they matched on the `NextState` value, they would need to make the
adjustments above
If the user manually utilized `apply_state_transition`, they should
instead use systems that trigger the `StateTransition` schedule.
---
## Future Work
There is still some future potential work in the area, but I wanted to
keep these potential features and changes separate to keep the scope
here contained, and keep the core of it easy to understand and use.
However, I do want to note some of these things, both as inspiration to
others and an illustration of what this PR could unlock.
- `NextState::Remove` - Now that the `State` related mechanisms all
utilize options (#11417), it's fairly easy to add support for explicit
state removal. And while `ComputedStates` can add and remove themselves,
right now `FreelyMutableState`s can't be removed from within the state
system. While it existed originally in this PR, it is a different
question with a separate scope and usability concerns - so having it as
it's own future PR seems like the best approach. This feature currently
lives in a separate branch in my fork, and the differences between it
and this PR can be seen here: https://github.com/lee-orr/bevy/pull/5
- `NextState::ReEnter` - this would allow you to trigger exit & entry
systems for the current state type. We can potentially also add a
`NextState::ReEnterRecirsive` to also re-trigger any states that depend
on the current one.
- More mechanisms for `State` updates - This PR would finally make
states that aren't a set of exclusive Enums useful, and with that comes
the question of setting state more effectively. Right now, to update a
state you either need to fully create the new state, or include the
`Res<Option<State<S>>>` resource in your system, clone the state, mutate
it, and then use `NextState.set(my_mutated_state)` to make it the
pending next state. There are a few other potential methods that could
be implemented in future PRs:
- Inverse Compute States - these would essentially be compute states
that have an additional (manually defined) function that can be used to
nudge the source states so that they result in the computed states
having a given value. For example, you could use set the `IsPaused`
state, and it would attempt to pause or unpause the game by modifying
the `AppState` as needed.
- Closure-based state modification - this would involve adding a
`NextState.modify(f: impl Fn(Option<S> -> Option<S>)` method, and then
you can pass in closures or function pointers to adjust the state as
needed.
- Message-based state modification - this would involve either creating
states that can respond to specific messages, similar to Elm or Redux.
These could either use the `NextState` mechanism or the Event mechanism.
- ~`SubStates` - which are essentially a hybrid of computed and manual
states. In the simplest (and most likely) version, they would work by
having a computed element that determines whether the state should
exist, and if it should has the capacity to add a new version in, but
then any changes to it's content would be freely mutated.~ this feature
is now part of this PR. See above.
- Lastly, since states are getting more complex there might be value in
moving them out of `bevy_ecs` and into their own crate, or at least out
of the `schedule` module into a `states` module. #11087
As mentioned, all these future work elements are TBD and are explicitly
not part of this PR - I just wanted to provide them as potential
explorations for the future.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Marcel Champagne <voiceofmarcel@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: MiniaczQ <xnetroidpl@gmail.com>
