# Objective
Make it possible to use `&World` as a system parameter
## Solution
It seems like all the pieces were already in place, very simple impl
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
#3457 adds the `doc_markdown` clippy lint, which checks doc comments to make sure code identifiers are escaped with backticks. This causes a lot of lint errors, so this is one of a number of PR's that will fix those lint errors one crate at a time.
This PR fixes lints in the `bevy_ecs` crate.
Fills in some gaps we had in our Bevy ECS tracing spans:
* Exclusive systems
* System Commands (for `apply_buffers = true` cases)
* System archetype updates
* Parallel system execution prep
# Objective
- New clippy lints with rust 1.57 are failing
## Solution
- Fixed clippy lints following suggestions
- I ignored clippy in old renderer because there was many and it will be removed soon
# Objective
- Fixes#2904 (see for context)
## Solution
- Simply hoist span creation out of the threaded task
- Confirmed to solve the issue locally
Now all events have the full span parent tree up through `bevy_ecs::schedule::stage` all the way to `bevy_app::app::bevy_app` (and its parents in bevy-consumer code, if any).
# Objective
- Avoid usages of `format!` that ~immediately get passed to another `format!`. This avoids a temporary allocation and is just generally cleaner.
## Solution
- `bevy_derive::shader_defs` does a `format!("{}", val.to_string())`, which is better written as just `format!("{}", val)`
- `bevy_diagnostic::log_diagnostics_plugin` does a `format!("{:>}", format!(...))`, which is better written as `format!("{:>}", format_args!(...))`
- `bevy_ecs::schedule` does `tracing::info!(..., name = &*format!("{:?}", val))`, which is better written with the tracing shorthand `tracing::info!(..., name = ?val)`
- `bevy_reflect::reflect` does `f.write_str(&format!(...))`, which is better written as `write!(f, ...)` (this could also be written using `f.debug_tuple`, but I opted to maintain alt debug behavior)
- `bevy_reflect::serde::{ser, de}` do `serde::Error::custom(format!(...))`, which is better written as `Error::custom(format_args!(...))`, as `Error::custom` takes `impl Display` and just immediately calls `format!` again
This implements the most minimal variant of #1843 - a derive for marker trait. This is a prerequisite to more complicated features like statically defined storage type or opt-out component reflection.
In order to make component struct's purpose explicit and avoid misuse, it must be annotated with `#[derive(Component)]` (manual impl is discouraged for compatibility). Right now this is just a marker trait, but in the future it might be expanded. Making this change early allows us to make further changes later without breaking backward compatibility for derive macro users.
This already prevents a lot of issues, like using bundles in `insert` calls. Primitive types are no longer valid components as well. This can be easily worked around by adding newtype wrappers and deriving `Component` for them.
One funny example of prevented bad code (from our own tests) is when an newtype struct or enum variant is used. Previously, it was possible to write `insert(Newtype)` instead of `insert(Newtype(value))`. That code compiled, because function pointers (in this case newtype struct constructor) implement `Send + Sync + 'static`, so we allowed them to be used as components. This is no longer the case and such invalid code will trigger a compile error.
Co-authored-by: = <=>
Co-authored-by: TheRawMeatball <therawmeatball@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
Fixes these issues:
- `WorldId`s currently aren't necessarily unique
- I want to guarantee that they're unique to safeguard my librarified version of https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/2805
- There probably hasn't been a collision yet, but they could technically collide
- `SystemId` isn't used for anything
- It's no longer used now that `Locals` are stored within the `System`.
- `bevy_ecs` depends on rand
## Solution
- Instead of randomly generating `WorldId`s, just use an incrementing atomic counter, panicing on overflow.
- Remove `SystemId`
- We do need to allow Locals for exclusive systems at some point, but exclusive systems couldn't access their own `SystemId` anyway.
- Now that these don't depend on rand, move it to a dev-dependency
## Todo
Determine if `WorldId` should be `u32` based instead
## Objective
The upcoming Bevy Book makes many references to the API documentation of bevy.
Most references belong to the first two chapters of the Bevy Book:
- bevyengine/bevy-website#176
- bevyengine/bevy-website#182
This PR attempts to improve the documentation of `bevy_ecs` and `bevy_app` in order to help readers of the Book who want to delve deeper into technical details.
## Solution
- Add crate and level module documentation
- Document the most important items (basically those included in the preludes), with the following style, where applicable:
- **Summary.** Short description of the item.
- **Second paragraph.** Detailed description of the item, without going too much in the implementation.
- **Code example(s).**
- **Safety or panic notes.**
## Collaboration
Any kind of collaboration is welcome, especially corrections, wording, new ideas and guidelines on where the focus should be put in.
---
### Related issues
- Fixes#2246
This updates the `pipelined-rendering` branch to use the latest `bevy_ecs` from `main`. This accomplishes a couple of goals:
1. prepares for upcoming `custom-shaders` branch changes, which were what drove many of the recent bevy_ecs changes on `main`
2. prepares for the soon-to-happen merge of `pipelined-rendering` into `main`. By including bevy_ecs changes now, we make that merge simpler / easier to review.
I split this up into 3 commits:
1. **add upstream bevy_ecs**: please don't bother reviewing this content. it has already received thorough review on `main` and is a literal copy/paste of the relevant folders (the old folders were deleted so the directories are literally exactly the same as `main`).
2. **support manual buffer application in stages**: this is used to enable the Extract step. we've already reviewed this once on the `pipelined-rendering` branch, but its worth looking at one more time in the new context of (1).
3. **support manual archetype updates in QueryState**: same situation as (2).
This is a rather simple but wide change, and it involves adding a new `bevy_app_macros` crate. Let me know if there is a better way to do any of this!
---
# Objective
- Allow adding and accessing sub-apps by using a label instead of an index
## Solution
- Migrate the bevy label implementation and derive code to the `bevy_utils` and `bevy_macro_utils` crates and then add a new `SubAppLabel` trait to the `bevy_app` crate that is used when adding or getting a sub-app from an app.
# Objective
- Remove all the `.system()` possible.
- Check for remaining missing cases.
## Solution
- Remove all `.system()`, fix compile errors
- 32 calls to `.system()` remains, mostly internals, the few others should be removed after #2446
This is extracted out of eb8f973646476b4a4926ba644a77e2b3a5772159 and includes some additional changes to remove all references to AppBuilder and fix examples that still used App::build() instead of App::new(). In addition I didn't extract the sub app feature as it isn't ready yet.
You can use `git diff --diff-filter=M eb8f973646476b4a4926ba644a77e2b3a5772159` to find all differences in this PR. The `--diff-filtered=M` filters all files added in the original commit but not in this commit away.
Co-Authored-By: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
- Continue work of #2398 and friends.
- Make `.system()` optional in run criteria APIs.
## Solution
- Slight change to `RunCriteriaDescriptorCoercion` signature and implementors.
- Implement `IntoRunCriteria` for `IntoSystem` rather than `System`.
- Remove some usages of `.system()` with run criteria in tests of `stage.rs`, to verify the implementation.
# Objective
- Extend work done in #2398.
- Make `.system()` syntax optional when using system descriptor API.
## Solution
- Slight change to `ParallelSystemDescriptorCoercion` signature and implementors.
---
I haven't touched exclusive systems, because it looks like the only two other solutions are going back to doubling our system insertion methods, or starting to lean into stageless. The latter will invalidate the former, so I think exclusive systems should remian pariahs until stageless.
I can grep & nuke `.system()` thorughout the codebase now, which might take a while, or we can do that in subsequent PR(s).
This can be your 6 months post-christmas present.
# Objective
- Make `.system` optional
- yeet
- It's ugly
- Alternative title: `.system` is dead; long live `.system`
- **yeet**
## Solution
- Use a higher ranked lifetime, and some trait magic.
N.B. This PR does not actually remove any `.system`s, except in a couple of examples. Once this is merged we can do that piecemeal across crates, and decide on syntax for labels.
- simplified code around archetype generations a little bit, as the special case value is not actually needed
- removed unnecessary UnsafeCell around pointer value that is never updated through shared references
- fixed and added a test for correct drop behaviour when removing sparse components through remove_bundle command
During PR #2046 @cart suggested that the `(): ()` notation is less legible than `_input: ()`. The first notation still managed to slip in though. This PR applies the second writing.
`ParallelSystemContainer`'s `system` pointer was extracted from box, but it was never deallocated. This change adds missing drop implementation that cleans up that memory.
The first commit monomorphizes `add_system_inner` which I think was intended to be monomorphized anyway. The second commit moves the type argument of `GraphNode` to an associated type.
The documentation for `ShouldRun` doesn't completely explain what each of the variants you can return does. For instance, it isn't very clear that looping systems aren't executed again until after all the systems in a stage have had a chance to run.
This PR adds to the documentation for `ShouldRun`, and hopefully clarifies what is happening during a stage's execution when run criteria are checked and systems are being executed.
Fixes#1753.
The problem was introduced while reworking the logic around stages' own criteria. Before #1675 they used to be stored and processed inline with the systems' criteria, and systems without criteria used that of their stage. After, criteria-less systems think they should run, always. This PR more or less restores previous behavior; a less cludge solution can wait until after 0.5 - ideally, until stageless.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
This is intended to help protect users against #1671. It doesn't resolve the issue, but I think its a good stop-gap solution for 0.5. A "full" fix would be very involved (and maybe not worth the added complexity).
In the current impl, next clears out the entire stack and replaces it with a new state. This PR moves this functionality into a replace method, and changes the behavior of next to only change the top state.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
I'm opening this prematurely; consider this an RFC that predates RFCs and therefore not super-RFC-like.
This PR does two "big" things: decouple run criteria from system sets, reimagine system sets as weapons of mass system description.
### What it lets us do:
* Reuse run criteria within a stage.
* Pipe output of one run criteria as input to another.
* Assign labels, dependencies, run criteria, and ambiguity sets to many systems at the same time.
### Things already done:
* Decoupled run criteria from system sets.
* Mass system description superpowers to `SystemSet`.
* Implemented `RunCriteriaDescriptor`.
* Removed `VirtualSystemSet`.
* Centralized all run criteria of `SystemStage`.
* Extended system descriptors with per-system run criteria.
* `.before()` and `.after()` for run criteria.
* Explicit order between state driver and related run criteria. Fixes#1672.
* Opt-in run criteria deduplication; default behavior is to panic.
* Labels (not exposed) for state run criteria; state run criteria are deduplicated.
### API issues that need discussion:
* [`FixedTimestep::step(1.0).label("my label")`](eaccf857cd/crates/bevy_ecs/src/schedule/run_criteria.rs (L120-L122)) and [`FixedTimestep::step(1.0).with_label("my label")`](eaccf857cd/crates/bevy_core/src/time/fixed_timestep.rs (L86-L89)) are both valid but do very different things.
---
I will try to maintain this post up-to-date as things change. Do check the diffs in "edited" thingy from time to time.
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Problem Definition
The current change tracking (via flags for both components and resources) fails to detect changes made by systems that are scheduled to run earlier in the frame than they are.
This issue is discussed at length in [#68](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/68) and [#54](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/54).
This is very much a draft PR, and contributions are welcome and needed.
# Criteria
1. Each change is detected at least once, no matter the ordering.
2. Each change is detected at most once, no matter the ordering.
3. Changes should be detected the same frame that they are made.
4. Competitive ergonomics. Ideally does not require opting-in.
5. Low CPU overhead of computation.
6. Memory efficient. This must not increase over time, except where the number of entities / resources does.
7. Changes should not be lost for systems that don't run.
8. A frame needs to act as a pure function. Given the same set of entities / components it needs to produce the same end state without side-effects.
**Exact** change-tracking proposals satisfy criteria 1 and 2.
**Conservative** change-tracking proposals satisfy criteria 1 but not 2.
**Flaky** change tracking proposals satisfy criteria 2 but not 1.
# Code Base Navigation
There are three types of flags:
- `Added`: A piece of data was added to an entity / `Resources`.
- `Mutated`: A piece of data was able to be modified, because its `DerefMut` was accessed
- `Changed`: The bitwise OR of `Added` and `Changed`
The special behavior of `ChangedRes`, with respect to the scheduler is being removed in [#1313](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/1313) and does not need to be reproduced.
`ChangedRes` and friends can be found in "bevy_ecs/core/resources/resource_query.rs".
The `Flags` trait for Components can be found in "bevy_ecs/core/query.rs".
`ComponentFlags` are stored in "bevy_ecs/core/archetypes.rs", defined on line 446.
# Proposals
**Proposal 5 was selected for implementation.**
## Proposal 0: No Change Detection
The baseline, where computations are performed on everything regardless of whether it changed.
**Type:** Conservative
**Pros:**
- already implemented
- will never miss events
- no overhead
**Cons:**
- tons of repeated work
- doesn't allow users to avoid repeating work (or monitoring for other changes)
## Proposal 1: Earlier-This-Tick Change Detection
The current approach as of Bevy 0.4. Flags are set, and then flushed at the end of each frame.
**Type:** Flaky
**Pros:**
- already implemented
- simple to understand
- low memory overhead (2 bits per component)
- low time overhead (clear every flag once per frame)
**Cons:**
- misses systems based on ordering
- systems that don't run every frame miss changes
- duplicates detection when looping
- can lead to unresolvable circular dependencies
## Proposal 2: Two-Tick Change Detection
Flags persist for two frames, using a double-buffer system identical to that used in events.
A change is observed if it is found in either the current frame's list of changes or the previous frame's.
**Type:** Conservative
**Pros:**
- easy to understand
- easy to implement
- low memory overhead (4 bits per component)
- low time overhead (bit mask and shift every flag once per frame)
**Cons:**
- can result in a great deal of duplicated work
- systems that don't run every frame miss changes
- duplicates detection when looping
## Proposal 3: Last-Tick Change Detection
Flags persist for two frames, using a double-buffer system identical to that used in events.
A change is observed if it is found in the previous frame's list of changes.
**Type:** Exact
**Pros:**
- exact
- easy to understand
- easy to implement
- low memory overhead (4 bits per component)
- low time overhead (bit mask and shift every flag once per frame)
**Cons:**
- change detection is always delayed, possibly causing painful chained delays
- systems that don't run every frame miss changes
- duplicates detection when looping
## Proposal 4: Flag-Doubling Change Detection
Combine Proposal 2 and Proposal 3. Differentiate between `JustChanged` (current behavior) and `Changed` (Proposal 3).
Pack this data into the flags according to [this implementation proposal](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/68#issuecomment-769174804).
**Type:** Flaky + Exact
**Pros:**
- allows users to acc
- easy to implement
- low memory overhead (4 bits per component)
- low time overhead (bit mask and shift every flag once per frame)
**Cons:**
- users must specify the type of change detection required
- still quite fragile to system ordering effects when using the flaky `JustChanged` form
- cannot get immediate + exact results
- systems that don't run every frame miss changes
- duplicates detection when looping
## [SELECTED] Proposal 5: Generation-Counter Change Detection
A global counter is increased after each system is run. Each component saves the time of last mutation, and each system saves the time of last execution. Mutation is detected when the component's counter is greater than the system's counter. Discussed [here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/68#issuecomment-769174804). How to handle addition detection is unsolved; the current proposal is to use the highest bit of the counter as in proposal 1.
**Type:** Exact (for mutations), flaky (for additions)
**Pros:**
- low time overhead (set component counter on access, set system counter after execution)
- robust to systems that don't run every frame
- robust to systems that loop
**Cons:**
- moderately complex implementation
- must be modified as systems are inserted dynamically
- medium memory overhead (4 bytes per component + system)
- unsolved addition detection
## Proposal 6: System-Data Change Detection
For each system, track which system's changes it has seen. This approach is only worth fully designing and implementing if Proposal 5 fails in some way.
**Type:** Exact
**Pros:**
- exact
- conceptually simple
**Cons:**
- requires storing data on each system
- implementation is complex
- must be modified as systems are inserted dynamically
## Proposal 7: Total-Order Change Detection
Discussed [here](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/68#issuecomment-754326523). This proposal is somewhat complicated by the new scheduler, but I believe it should still be conceptually feasible. This approach is only worth fully designing and implementing if Proposal 5 fails in some way.
**Type:** Exact
**Pros:**
- exact
- efficient data storage relative to other exact proposals
**Cons:**
- requires access to the scheduler
- complex implementation and difficulty grokking
- must be modified as systems are inserted dynamically
# Tests
- We will need to verify properties 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8. Priority: 1 > 2 = 3 > 8 > 7
- Ideally we can use identical user-facing syntax for all proposals, allowing us to re-use the same syntax for each.
- When writing tests, we need to carefully specify order using explicit dependencies.
- These tests will need to be duplicated for both components and resources.
- We need to be sure to handle cases where ambiguous system orders exist.
`changing_system` is always the system that makes the changes, and `detecting_system` always detects the changes.
The component / resource changed will be simple boolean wrapper structs.
## Basic Added / Mutated / Changed
2 x 3 design:
- Resources vs. Components
- Added vs. Changed vs. Mutated
- `changing_system` runs before `detecting_system`
- verify at the end of tick 2
## At Least Once
2 x 3 design:
- Resources vs. Components
- Added vs. Changed vs. Mutated
- `changing_system` runs after `detecting_system`
- verify at the end of tick 2
## At Most Once
2 x 3 design:
- Resources vs. Components
- Added vs. Changed vs. Mutated
- `changing_system` runs once before `detecting_system`
- increment a counter based on the number of changes detected
- verify at the end of tick 2
## Fast Detection
2 x 3 design:
- Resources vs. Components
- Added vs. Changed vs. Mutated
- `changing_system` runs before `detecting_system`
- verify at the end of tick 1
## Ambiguous System Ordering Robustness
2 x 3 x 2 design:
- Resources vs. Components
- Added vs. Changed vs. Mutated
- `changing_system` runs [before/after] `detecting_system` in tick 1
- `changing_system` runs [after/before] `detecting_system` in tick 2
## System Pausing
2 x 3 design:
- Resources vs. Components
- Added vs. Changed vs. Mutated
- `changing_system` runs in tick 1, then is disabled by run criteria
- `detecting_system` is disabled by run criteria until it is run once during tick 3
- verify at the end of tick 3
## Addition Causes Mutation
2 design:
- Resources vs. Components
- `adding_system_1` adds a component / resource
- `adding system_2` adds the same component / resource
- verify the `Mutated` flag at the end of the tick
- verify the `Added` flag at the end of the tick
First check tests for: https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/333
Second check tests for: https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/1443
## Changes Made By Commands
- `adding_system` runs in Update in tick 1, and sends a command to add a component
- `detecting_system` runs in Update in tick 1 and 2, after `adding_system`
- We can't detect the changes in tick 1, since they haven't been processed yet
- If we were to track these changes as being emitted by `adding_system`, we can't detect the changes in tick 2 either, since `detecting_system` has already run once after `adding_system` :(
# Benchmarks
See: [general advice](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/blob/master/docs/profiling.md), [Criterion crate](https://github.com/bheisler/criterion.rs)
There are several critical parameters to vary:
1. entity count (1 to 10^9)
2. fraction of entities that are changed (0% to 100%)
3. cost to perform work on changed entities, i.e. workload (1 ns to 1s)
1 and 2 should be varied between benchmark runs. 3 can be added on computationally.
We want to measure:
- memory cost
- run time
We should collect these measurements across several frames (100?) to reduce bootup effects and accurately measure the mean, variance and drift.
Entity-component change detection is much more important to benchmark than resource change detection, due to the orders of magnitude higher number of pieces of data.
No change detection at all should be included in benchmarks as a second control for cases where missing changes is unacceptable.
## Graphs
1. y: performance, x: log_10(entity count), color: proposal, facet: performance metric. Set cost to perform work to 0.
2. y: run time, x: cost to perform work, color: proposal, facet: fraction changed. Set number of entities to 10^6
3. y: memory, x: frames, color: proposal
# Conclusions
1. Is the theoretical categorization of the proposals correct according to our tests?
2. How does the performance of the proposals compare without any load?
3. How does the performance of the proposals compare with realistic loads?
4. At what workload does more exact change tracking become worth the (presumably) higher overhead?
5. When does adding change-detection to save on work become worthwhile?
6. Is there enough divergence in performance between the best solutions in each class to ship more than one change-tracking solution?
# Implementation Plan
1. Write a test suite.
2. Verify that tests fail for existing approach.
3. Write a benchmark suite.
4. Get performance numbers for existing approach.
5. Implement, test and benchmark various solutions using a Git branch per proposal.
6. Create a draft PR with all solutions and present results to team.
7. Select a solution and replace existing change detection.
Co-authored-by: Brice DAVIER <bricedavier@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
An alternative to StateStages that uses SystemSets. Also includes pop and push operations since this was originally developed for my personal project which needed them.
