mirror of
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy
synced 2024-11-22 20:53:53 +00:00
5 commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Joona Aalto
|
a795de30b4
|
Use impl Into<A> for Assets::add (#10878)
# Motivation
When spawning entities into a scene, it is very common to create assets
like meshes and materials and to add them via asset handles. A common
setup might look like this:
```rust
fn setup(
mut commands: Commands,
mut meshes: ResMut<Assets<Mesh>>,
mut materials: ResMut<Assets<StandardMaterial>>,
) {
commands.spawn(PbrBundle {
mesh: meshes.add(Mesh::from(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 })),
material: materials.add(StandardMaterial::from(Color::RED)),
..default()
});
}
```
Let's take a closer look at the part that adds the assets using `add`.
```rust
mesh: meshes.add(Mesh::from(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 })),
material: materials.add(StandardMaterial::from(Color::RED)),
```
Here, "mesh" and "material" are both repeated three times. It's very
explicit, but I find it to be a bit verbose. In addition to being more
code to read and write, the extra characters can sometimes also lead to
the code being formatted to span multiple lines even though the core
task, adding e.g. a primitive mesh, is extremely simple.
A way to address this is by using `.into()`:
```rust
mesh: meshes.add(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 }.into()),
material: materials.add(Color::RED.into()),
```
This is fine, but from the names and the type of `meshes`, we already
know what the type should be. It's very clear that `Cube` should be
turned into a `Mesh` because of the context it's used in. `.into()` is
just seven characters, but it's so common that it quickly adds up and
gets annoying.
It would be nice if you could skip all of the conversion and let Bevy
handle it for you:
```rust
mesh: meshes.add(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 }),
material: materials.add(Color::RED),
```
# Objective
Make adding assets more ergonomic by making `Assets::add` take an `impl
Into<A>` instead of `A`.
## Solution
`Assets::add` now takes an `impl Into<A>` instead of `A`, so e.g. this
works:
```rust
commands.spawn(PbrBundle {
mesh: meshes.add(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 }),
material: materials.add(Color::RED),
..default()
});
```
I also changed all examples to use this API, which increases consistency
as well because `Mesh::from` and `into` were being used arbitrarily even
in the same file. This also gets rid of some lines of code because
formatting is nicer.
---
## Changelog
- `Assets::add` now takes an `impl Into<A>` instead of `A`
- Examples don't use `T::from(K)` or `K.into()` when adding assets
## Migration Guide
Some `into` calls that worked previously might now be broken because of
the new trait bounds. You need to either remove `into` or perform the
conversion explicitly with `from`:
```rust
// Doesn't compile
let mesh_handle = meshes.add(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 }.into()),
// These compile
let mesh_handle = meshes.add(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 }),
let mesh_handle = meshes.add(Mesh::from(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 })),
```
## Concerns
I believe the primary concerns might be:
1. Is this too implicit?
2. Does this increase codegen bloat?
Previously, the two APIs were using `into` or `from`, and now it's
"nothing" or `from`. You could argue that `into` is slightly more
explicit than "nothing" in cases like the earlier examples where a
`Color` gets converted to e.g. a `StandardMaterial`, but I personally
don't think `into` adds much value even in this case, and you could
still see the actual type from the asset type.
As for codegen bloat, I doubt it adds that much, but I'm not very
familiar with the details of codegen. I personally value the user-facing
code reduction and ergonomics improvements that these changes would
provide, but it might be worth checking the other effects in more
detail.
Another slight concern is migration pain; apps might have a ton of
`into` calls that would need to be removed, and it did take me a while
to do so for Bevy itself (maybe around 20-40 minutes). However, I think
the fact that there *are* so many `into` calls just highlights that the
API could be made nicer, and I'd gladly migrate my own projects for it.
|
||
Joseph
|
02b520b4e8
|
Split ComputedVisibility into two components to allow for accurate change detection and speed up visibility propagation (#9497)
# Objective Fix #8267. Fixes half of #7840. The `ComputedVisibility` component contains two flags: hierarchy visibility, and view visibility (whether its visible to any cameras). Due to the modular and open-ended way that view visibility is computed, it triggers change detection every single frame, even when the value does not change. Since hierarchy visibility is stored in the same component as view visibility, this means that change detection for inherited visibility is completely broken. At the company I work for, this has become a real issue. We are using change detection to only re-render scenes when necessary. The broken state of change detection for computed visibility means that we have to to rely on the non-inherited `Visibility` component for now. This is workable in the early stages of our project, but since we will inevitably want to use the hierarchy, we will have to either: 1. Roll our own solution for computed visibility. 2. Fix the issue for everyone. ## Solution Split the `ComputedVisibility` component into two: `InheritedVisibilty` and `ViewVisibility`. This allows change detection to behave properly for `InheritedVisibility`. View visiblity is still erratic, although it is less useful to be able to detect changes for this flavor of visibility. Overall, this actually simplifies the API. Since the visibility system consists of self-explaining components, it is much easier to document the behavior and usage. This approach is more modular and "ECS-like" -- one could strip out the `ViewVisibility` component entirely if it's not needed, and rely only on inherited visibility. --- ## Changelog - `ComputedVisibility` has been removed in favor of: `InheritedVisibility` and `ViewVisiblity`. ## Migration Guide The `ComputedVisibilty` component has been split into `InheritedVisiblity` and `ViewVisibility`. Replace any usages of `ComputedVisibility::is_visible_in_hierarchy` with `InheritedVisibility::get`, and replace `ComputedVisibility::is_visible_in_view` with `ViewVisibility::get`. ```rust // Before: commands.spawn(VisibilityBundle { visibility: Visibility::Inherited, computed_visibility: ComputedVisibility::default(), }); // After: commands.spawn(VisibilityBundle { visibility: Visibility::Inherited, inherited_visibility: InheritedVisibility::default(), view_visibility: ViewVisibility::default(), }); ``` ```rust // Before: fn my_system(q: Query<&ComputedVisibilty>) { for vis in &q { if vis.is_visible_in_hierarchy() { // After: fn my_system(q: Query<&InheritedVisibility>) { for inherited_visibility in &q { if inherited_visibility.get() { ``` ```rust // Before: fn my_system(q: Query<&ComputedVisibilty>) { for vis in &q { if vis.is_visible_in_view() { // After: fn my_system(q: Query<&ViewVisibility>) { for view_visibility in &q { if view_visibility.get() { ``` ```rust // Before: fn my_system(mut q: Query<&mut ComputedVisibilty>) { for vis in &mut q { vis.set_visible_in_view(); // After: fn my_system(mut q: Query<&mut ViewVisibility>) { for view_visibility in &mut q { view_visibility.set(); ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Swain <robert.swain@gmail.com> |
||
Carter Anderson
|
aefe1f0739
|
Schedule-First: the new and improved add_systems (#8079)
Co-authored-by: Mike <mike.hsu@gmail.com> |
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
01aedc8431 |
Spawn now takes a Bundle (#6054)
# Objective Now that we can consolidate Bundles and Components under a single insert (thanks to #2975 and #6039), almost 100% of world spawns now look like `world.spawn().insert((Some, Tuple, Here))`. Spawning an entity without any components is an extremely uncommon pattern, so it makes sense to give spawn the "first class" ergonomic api. This consolidated api should be made consistent across all spawn apis (such as World and Commands). ## Solution All `spawn` apis (`World::spawn`, `Commands:;spawn`, `ChildBuilder::spawn`, and `WorldChildBuilder::spawn`) now accept a bundle as input: ```rust // before: commands .spawn() .insert((A, B, C)); world .spawn() .insert((A, B, C); // after commands.spawn((A, B, C)); world.spawn((A, B, C)); ``` All existing instances of `spawn_bundle` have been deprecated in favor of the new `spawn` api. A new `spawn_empty` has been added, replacing the old `spawn` api. By allowing `world.spawn(some_bundle)` to replace `world.spawn().insert(some_bundle)`, this opened the door to removing the initial entity allocation in the "empty" archetype / table done in `spawn()` (and subsequent move to the actual archetype in `.insert(some_bundle)`). This improves spawn performance by over 10%:  To take this measurement, I added a new `world_spawn` benchmark. Unfortunately, optimizing `Commands::spawn` is slightly less trivial, as Commands expose the Entity id of spawned entities prior to actually spawning. Doing the optimization would (naively) require assurances that the `spawn(some_bundle)` command is applied before all other commands involving the entity (which would not necessarily be true, if memory serves). Optimizing `Commands::spawn` this way does feel possible, but it will require careful thought (and maybe some additional checks), which deserves its own PR. For now, it has the same performance characteristics of the current `Commands::spawn_bundle` on main. **Note that 99% of this PR is simple renames and refactors. The only code that needs careful scrutiny is the new `World::spawn()` impl, which is relatively straightforward, but it has some new unsafe code (which re-uses battle tested BundlerSpawner code path).** --- ## Changelog - All `spawn` apis (`World::spawn`, `Commands:;spawn`, `ChildBuilder::spawn`, and `WorldChildBuilder::spawn`) now accept a bundle as input - All instances of `spawn_bundle` have been deprecated in favor of the new `spawn` api - World and Commands now have `spawn_empty()`, which is equivalent to the old `spawn()` behavior. ## Migration Guide ```rust // Old (0.8): commands .spawn() .insert_bundle((A, B, C)); // New (0.9) commands.spawn((A, B, C)); // Old (0.8): commands.spawn_bundle((A, B, C)); // New (0.9) commands.spawn((A, B, C)); // Old (0.8): let entity = commands.spawn().id(); // New (0.9) let entity = commands.spawn_empty().id(); // Old (0.8) let entity = world.spawn().id(); // New (0.9) let entity = world.spawn_empty(); ``` |
||
Nicola Papale
|
6c5403cf47 |
Add warning when a hierarchy component is missing (#5590)
# Objective A common pitfall since 0.8 is the requirement on `ComputedVisibility` being present on all ancestors of an entity that itself has `ComputedVisibility`, without which, the entity becomes invisible. I myself hit the issue and got very confused, and saw a few people hit it as well, so it makes sense to provide a hint of what to do when such a situation is encountered. - Fixes #5849 - Closes #5616 - Closes #2277 - Closes #5081 ## Solution We now check that all entities with both a `Parent` and a `ComputedVisibility` component have parents that themselves have a `ComputedVisibility` component. Note that the warning is only printed once. We also add a similar warning to `GlobalTransform`. This only emits a warning. Because sometimes it could be an intended behavior. Alternatives: - Do nothing and keep repeating to newcomers how to avoid recurring pitfalls - Make the transform and visibility propagation tolerant to missing components (#5616) - Probably archetype invariants, though the current draft would not allow detecting that kind of errors --- ## Changelog - Add a warning when encountering dubious component hierarchy structure Co-authored-by: Nicola Papale <nicopap@users.noreply.github.com> |
