mirror of
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy
synced 2024-11-14 08:58:04 +00:00
10 commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Carter Anderson
|
f487407e07 |
Camera Driven Rendering (#4745)
This adds "high level camera driven rendering" to Bevy. The goal is to give users more control over what gets rendered (and where) without needing to deal with render logic. This will make scenarios like "render to texture", "multiple windows", "split screen", "2d on 3d", "3d on 2d", "pass layering", and more significantly easier. Here is an [example of a 2d render sandwiched between two 3d renders (each from a different perspective)](https://gist.github.com/cart/4fe56874b2e53bc5594a182fc76f4915):  Users can now spawn a camera, point it at a RenderTarget (a texture or a window), and it will "just work". Rendering to a second window is as simple as spawning a second camera and assigning it to a specific window id: ```rust // main camera (main window) commands.spawn_bundle(Camera2dBundle::default()); // second camera (other window) commands.spawn_bundle(Camera2dBundle { camera: Camera { target: RenderTarget::Window(window_id), ..default() }, ..default() }); ``` Rendering to a texture is as simple as pointing the camera at a texture: ```rust commands.spawn_bundle(Camera2dBundle { camera: Camera { target: RenderTarget::Texture(image_handle), ..default() }, ..default() }); ``` Cameras now have a "render priority", which controls the order they are drawn in. If you want to use a camera's output texture as a texture in the main pass, just set the priority to a number lower than the main pass camera (which defaults to `0`). ```rust // main pass camera with a default priority of 0 commands.spawn_bundle(Camera2dBundle::default()); commands.spawn_bundle(Camera2dBundle { camera: Camera { target: RenderTarget::Texture(image_handle.clone()), priority: -1, ..default() }, ..default() }); commands.spawn_bundle(SpriteBundle { texture: image_handle, ..default() }) ``` Priority can also be used to layer to cameras on top of each other for the same RenderTarget. This is what "2d on top of 3d" looks like in the new system: ```rust commands.spawn_bundle(Camera3dBundle::default()); commands.spawn_bundle(Camera2dBundle { camera: Camera { // this will render 2d entities "on top" of the default 3d camera's render priority: 1, ..default() }, ..default() }); ``` There is no longer the concept of a global "active camera". Resources like `ActiveCamera<Camera2d>` and `ActiveCamera<Camera3d>` have been replaced with the camera-specific `Camera::is_active` field. This does put the onus on users to manage which cameras should be active. Cameras are now assigned a single render graph as an "entry point", which is configured on each camera entity using the new `CameraRenderGraph` component. The old `PerspectiveCameraBundle` and `OrthographicCameraBundle` (generic on camera marker components like Camera2d and Camera3d) have been replaced by `Camera3dBundle` and `Camera2dBundle`, which set 3d and 2d default values for the `CameraRenderGraph` and projections. ```rust // old 3d perspective camera commands.spawn_bundle(PerspectiveCameraBundle::default()) // new 3d perspective camera commands.spawn_bundle(Camera3dBundle::default()) ``` ```rust // old 2d orthographic camera commands.spawn_bundle(OrthographicCameraBundle::new_2d()) // new 2d orthographic camera commands.spawn_bundle(Camera2dBundle::default()) ``` ```rust // old 3d orthographic camera commands.spawn_bundle(OrthographicCameraBundle::new_3d()) // new 3d orthographic camera commands.spawn_bundle(Camera3dBundle { projection: OrthographicProjection { scale: 3.0, scaling_mode: ScalingMode::FixedVertical, ..default() }.into(), ..default() }) ``` Note that `Camera3dBundle` now uses a new `Projection` enum instead of hard coding the projection into the type. There are a number of motivators for this change: the render graph is now a part of the bundle, the way "generic bundles" work in the rust type system prevents nice `..default()` syntax, and changing projections at runtime is much easier with an enum (ex for editor scenarios). I'm open to discussing this choice, but I'm relatively certain we will all come to the same conclusion here. Camera2dBundle and Camera3dBundle are much clearer than being generic on marker components / using non-default constructors. If you want to run a custom render graph on a camera, just set the `CameraRenderGraph` component: ```rust commands.spawn_bundle(Camera3dBundle { camera_render_graph: CameraRenderGraph::new(some_render_graph_name), ..default() }) ``` Just note that if the graph requires data from specific components to work (such as `Camera3d` config, which is provided in the `Camera3dBundle`), make sure the relevant components have been added. Speaking of using components to configure graphs / passes, there are a number of new configuration options: ```rust commands.spawn_bundle(Camera3dBundle { camera_3d: Camera3d { // overrides the default global clear color clear_color: ClearColorConfig::Custom(Color::RED), ..default() }, ..default() }) commands.spawn_bundle(Camera3dBundle { camera_3d: Camera3d { // disables clearing clear_color: ClearColorConfig::None, ..default() }, ..default() }) ``` Expect to see more of the "graph configuration Components on Cameras" pattern in the future. By popular demand, UI no longer requires a dedicated camera. `UiCameraBundle` has been removed. `Camera2dBundle` and `Camera3dBundle` now both default to rendering UI as part of their own render graphs. To disable UI rendering for a camera, disable it using the CameraUi component: ```rust commands .spawn_bundle(Camera3dBundle::default()) .insert(CameraUi { is_enabled: false, ..default() }) ``` ## Other Changes * The separate clear pass has been removed. We should revisit this for things like sky rendering, but I think this PR should "keep it simple" until we're ready to properly support that (for code complexity and performance reasons). We can come up with the right design for a modular clear pass in a followup pr. * I reorganized bevy_core_pipeline into Core2dPlugin and Core3dPlugin (and core_2d / core_3d modules). Everything is pretty much the same as before, just logically separate. I've moved relevant types (like Camera2d, Camera3d, Camera3dBundle, Camera2dBundle) into their relevant modules, which is what motivated this reorganization. * I adapted the `scene_viewer` example (which relied on the ActiveCameras behavior) to the new system. I also refactored bits and pieces to be a bit simpler. * All of the examples have been ported to the new camera approach. `render_to_texture` and `multiple_windows` are now _much_ simpler. I removed `two_passes` because it is less relevant with the new approach. If someone wants to add a new "layered custom pass with CameraRenderGraph" example, that might fill a similar niche. But I don't feel much pressure to add that in this pr. * Cameras now have `target_logical_size` and `target_physical_size` fields, which makes finding the size of a camera's render target _much_ simpler. As a result, the `Assets<Image>` and `Windows` parameters were removed from `Camera::world_to_screen`, making that operation much more ergonomic. * Render order ambiguities between cameras with the same target and the same priority now produce a warning. This accomplishes two goals: 1. Now that there is no "global" active camera, by default spawning two cameras will result in two renders (one covering the other). This would be a silent performance killer that would be hard to detect after the fact. By detecting ambiguities, we can provide a helpful warning when this occurs. 2. Render order ambiguities could result in unexpected / unpredictable render results. Resolving them makes sense. ## Follow Up Work * Per-Camera viewports, which will make it possible to render to a smaller area inside of a RenderTarget (great for something like splitscreen) * Camera-specific MSAA config (should use the same "overriding" pattern used for ClearColor) * Graph Based Camera Ordering: priorities are simple, but they make complicated ordering constraints harder to express. We should consider adopting a "graph based" camera ordering model with "before" and "after" relationships to other cameras (or build it "on top" of the priority system). * Consider allowing graphs to run subgraphs from any nest level (aka a global namespace for graphs). Right now the 2d and 3d graphs each need their own UI subgraph, which feels "fine" in the short term. But being able to share subgraphs between other subgraphs seems valuable. * Consider splitting `bevy_core_pipeline` into `bevy_core_2d` and `bevy_core_3d` packages. Theres a shared "clear color" dependency here, which would need a new home. |
||
Robert Swain
|
cc4062ec43 |
Split mesh shader files (#4867)
# Objective - Split PBR and 2D mesh shaders into types and bindings to prepare the shaders to be more reusable. - See #3969 for details. I'm doing this in multiple steps to make review easier. --- ## Changelog - Changed: 2D and PBR mesh shaders are now split into types and bindings, the following shader imports are available: `bevy_pbr::mesh_view_types`, `bevy_pbr::mesh_view_bindings`, `bevy_pbr::mesh_types`, `bevy_pbr::mesh_bindings`, `bevy_sprite::mesh2d_view_types`, `bevy_sprite::mesh2d_view_bindings`, `bevy_sprite::mesh2d_types`, `bevy_sprite::mesh2d_bindings` ## Migration Guide - In shaders for 3D meshes: - `#import bevy_pbr::mesh_view_bind_group` -> `#import bevy_pbr::mesh_view_bindings` - `#import bevy_pbr::mesh_struct` -> `#import bevy_pbr::mesh_types` - NOTE: If you are using the mesh bind group at bind group index 2, you can remove those binding statements in your shader and just use `#import bevy_pbr::mesh_bindings` which itself imports the mesh types needed for the bindings. - In shaders for 2D meshes: - `#import bevy_sprite::mesh2d_view_bind_group` -> `#import bevy_sprite::mesh2d_view_bindings` - `#import bevy_sprite::mesh2d_struct` -> `#import bevy_sprite::mesh2d_types` - NOTE: If you are using the mesh2d bind group at bind group index 2, you can remove those binding statements in your shader and just use `#import bevy_sprite::mesh2d_bindings` which itself imports the mesh2d types needed for the bindings. |
||
Mark Schmale
|
1ba7429371 |
Doc/module style doc blocks for examples (#4438)
# Objective Provide a starting point for #3951, or a partial solution. Providing a few comment blocks to discuss, and hopefully find better one in the process. ## Solution Since I am pretty new to pretty much anything in this context, I figured I'd just start with a draft for some file level doc blocks. For some of them I found more relevant details (or at least things I considered interessting), for some others there is less. ## Changelog - Moved some existing comments from main() functions in the 2d examples to the file header level - Wrote some more comment blocks for most other 2d examples TODO: - [x] 2d/sprite_sheet, wasnt able to come up with something good yet - [x] all other example groups... Also: Please let me know if the commit style is okay, or to verbose. I could certainly squash these things, or add more details if needed. I also hope its okay to raise this PR this early, with just a few files changed. Took me long enough and I dont wanted to let it go to waste because I lost motivation to do the whole thing. Additionally I am somewhat uncertain over the style and contents of the commets. So let me know what you thing please. |
||
Dusty DeWeese
|
82d849d3dc |
Add support for vertex colors (#4528)
# Objective Add support for vertex colors ## Solution This change is modeled after how vertex tangents are handled, so the shader is conditionally compiled with vertex color support if the mesh has the corresponding attribute set. Vertex colors are multiplied by the base color. I'm not sure if this is the best for all cases, but may be useful for modifying vertex colors without creating a new mesh. I chose `VertexFormat::Float32x4`, but I'd prefer 16-bit floats if/when support is added. ## Changelog ### Added - Vertex colors can be specified using the `Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_COLOR` mesh attribute. |
||
Christopher Durham
|
3d4e0066f4 |
Move float_ord from bevy_core to bevy_utils (#4189)
# Objective Reduce the catch-all grab-bag of functionality in bevy_core by moving FloatOrd to bevy_utils. A step in addressing #2931 and splitting bevy_core into more specific locations. ## Solution Move FloatOrd into bevy_utils. Fix the compile errors. As a result, bevy_core_pipeline, bevy_pbr, bevy_sprite, bevy_text, and bevy_ui no longer depend on bevy_core (they were only using it for `FloatOrd` previously). |
||
Kurt Kühnert
|
9e450f2827 |
Compute Pipeline Specialization (#3979)
# Objective - Fixes #3970 - To support Bevy's shader abstraction(shader defs, shader imports and hot shader reloading) for compute shaders, I have followed carts advice and change the `PipelinenCache` to accommodate both compute and render pipelines. ## Solution - renamed `RenderPipelineCache` to `PipelineCache` - Cached Pipelines are now represented by an enum (render, compute) - split the `SpecializedPipelines` into `SpecializedRenderPipelines` and `SpecializedComputePipelines` - updated the game of life example ## Open Questions - should `SpecializedRenderPipelines` and `SpecializedComputePipelines` be merged and how would we do that? - should the `get_render_pipeline` and `get_compute_pipeline` methods be merged? - is pipeline specialization for different entry points a good pattern Co-authored-by: Kurt Kühnert <51823519+Ku95@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com> |
||
Rob Parrett
|
1a85fb5ea3 |
Fix mesh2d_manual example (#4037)
# Objective Fixes #4036 ## Solution - Use `VertexBufferLayout::from_vertex_formats` - Actually put a u32 into `ATTRIBUTE_COLOR` and convert it in the shader I'm not 100% sure about the color stuff. It seems like `ATTRIBUTE_COLOR` has been `Uint32` this whole time, but this example previously worked with `[f32; 4]` somehow, perhaps because the vertex layout was manually specified. Let me know if that can be improved, or feel free to close for an alternative fix. |
||
Alice Cecile
|
557ab9897a |
Make get_resource (and friends) infallible (#4047)
# Objective - In the large majority of cases, users were calling `.unwrap()` immediately after `.get_resource`. - Attempting to add more helpful error messages here resulted in endless manual boilerplate (see #3899 and the linked PRs). ## Solution - Add an infallible variant named `.resource` and so on. - Use these infallible variants over `.get_resource().unwrap()` across the code base. ## Notes I did not provide equivalent methods on `WorldCell`, in favor of removing it entirely in #3939. ## Migration Guide Infallible variants of `.get_resource` have been added that implicitly panic, rather than needing to be unwrapped. Replace `world.get_resource::<Foo>().unwrap()` with `world.resource::<Foo>()`. ## Impact - `.unwrap` search results before: 1084 - `.unwrap` search results after: 942 - internal `unwrap_or_else` calls added: 4 - trivial unwrap calls removed from tests and code: 146 - uses of the new `try_get_resource` API: 11 - percentage of the time the unwrapping API was used internally: 93% |
||
Carter Anderson
|
e369a8ad51 |
Mesh vertex buffer layouts (#3959)
This PR makes a number of changes to how meshes and vertex attributes are handled, which the goal of enabling easy and flexible custom vertex attributes:
* Reworks the `Mesh` type to use the newly added `VertexAttribute` internally
* `VertexAttribute` defines the name, a unique `VertexAttributeId`, and a `VertexFormat`
* `VertexAttributeId` is used to produce consistent sort orders for vertex buffer generation, replacing the more expensive and often surprising "name based sorting"
* Meshes can be used to generate a `MeshVertexBufferLayout`, which defines the layout of the gpu buffer produced by the mesh. `MeshVertexBufferLayouts` can then be used to generate actual `VertexBufferLayouts` according to the requirements of a specific pipeline. This decoupling of "mesh layout" vs "pipeline vertex buffer layout" is what enables custom attributes. We don't need to standardize _mesh layouts_ or contort meshes to meet the needs of a specific pipeline. As long as the mesh has what the pipeline needs, it will work transparently.
* Mesh-based pipelines now specialize on `&MeshVertexBufferLayout` via the new `SpecializedMeshPipeline` trait (which behaves like `SpecializedPipeline`, but adds `&MeshVertexBufferLayout`). The integrity of the pipeline cache is maintained because the `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is treated as part of the key (which is fully abstracted from implementers of the trait ... no need to add any additional info to the specialization key).
* Hashing `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is too expensive to do for every entity, every frame. To make this scalable, I added a generalized "pre-hashing" solution to `bevy_utils`: `Hashed<T>` keys and `PreHashMap<K, V>` (which uses `Hashed<T>` internally) . Why didn't I just do the quick and dirty in-place "pre-compute hash and use that u64 as a key in a hashmap" that we've done in the past? Because its wrong! Hashes by themselves aren't enough because two different values can produce the same hash. Re-hashing a hash is even worse! I decided to build a generalized solution because this pattern has come up in the past and we've chosen to do the wrong thing. Now we can do the right thing! This did unfortunately require pulling in `hashbrown` and using that in `bevy_utils`, because avoiding re-hashes requires the `raw_entry_mut` api, which isn't stabilized yet (and may never be ... `entry_ref` has favor now, but also isn't available yet). If std's HashMap ever provides the tools we need, we can move back to that. Note that adding `hashbrown` doesn't increase our dependency count because it was already in our tree. I will probably break these changes out into their own PR.
* Specializing on `MeshVertexBufferLayout` has one non-obvious behavior: it can produce identical pipelines for two different MeshVertexBufferLayouts. To optimize the number of active pipelines / reduce re-binds while drawing, I de-duplicate pipelines post-specialization using the final `VertexBufferLayout` as the key. For example, consider a pipeline that needs the layout `(position, normal)` and is specialized using two meshes: `(position, normal, uv)` and `(position, normal, other_vec2)`. If both of these meshes result in `(position, normal)` specializations, we can use the same pipeline! Now we do. Cool!
To briefly illustrate, this is what the relevant section of `MeshPipeline`'s specialization code looks like now:
```rust
impl SpecializedMeshPipeline for MeshPipeline {
type Key = MeshPipelineKey;
fn specialize(
&self,
key: Self::Key,
layout: &MeshVertexBufferLayout,
) -> RenderPipelineDescriptor {
let mut vertex_attributes = vec![
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_POSITION.at_shader_location(0),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL.at_shader_location(1),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_UV_0.at_shader_location(2),
];
let mut shader_defs = Vec::new();
if layout.contains(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT) {
shader_defs.push(String::from("VERTEX_TANGENTS"));
vertex_attributes.push(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT.at_shader_location(3));
}
let vertex_buffer_layout = layout
.get_layout(&vertex_attributes)
.expect("Mesh is missing a vertex attribute");
```
Notice that this is _much_ simpler than it was before. And now any mesh with any layout can be used with this pipeline, provided it has vertex postions, normals, and uvs. We even got to remove `HAS_TANGENTS` from MeshPipelineKey and `has_tangents` from `GpuMesh`, because that information is redundant with `MeshVertexBufferLayout`.
This is still a draft because I still need to:
* Add more docs
* Experiment with adding error handling to mesh pipeline specialization (which would print errors at runtime when a mesh is missing a vertex attribute required by a pipeline). If it doesn't tank perf, we'll keep it.
* Consider breaking out the PreHash / hashbrown changes into a separate PR.
* Add an example illustrating this change
* Verify that the "mesh-specialized pipeline de-duplication code" works properly
Please dont yell at me for not doing these things yet :) Just trying to get this in peoples' hands asap.
Alternative to #3120
Fixes #3030
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
|
||
davier
|
c2da7800e3 |
Add 2d meshes and materials (#3460)
# Objective The current 2d rendering is specialized to render sprites, we need a generic way to render 2d items, using meshes and materials like we have for 3d. ## Solution I cloned a good part of `bevy_pbr` into `bevy_sprite/src/mesh2d`, removed lighting and pbr itself, adapted it to 2d rendering, added a `ColorMaterial`, and modified the sprite rendering to break batches around 2d meshes. ~~The PR is a bit crude; I tried to change as little as I could in both the parts copied from 3d and the current sprite rendering to make reviewing easier. In the future, I expect we could make the sprite rendering a normal 2d material, cleanly integrated with the rest.~~ _edit: see <https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/3460#issuecomment-1003605194>_ ## Remaining work - ~~don't require mesh normals~~ _out of scope_ - ~~add an example~~ _done_ - support 2d meshes & materials in the UI? - bikeshed names (I didn't think hard about naming, please check if it's fine) ## Remaining questions - ~~should we add a depth buffer to 2d now that there are 2d meshes?~~ _let's revisit that when we have an opaque render phase_ - ~~should we add MSAA support to the sprites, or remove it from the 2d meshes?~~ _I added MSAA to sprites since it's really needed for 2d meshes_ - ~~how to customize vertex attributes?~~ _#3120_ Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com> |
