# Objective
Several of our APIs (namely gizmos and bounding) use isometries on
current Bevy main. This is nicer than separate properties in a lot of
cases, but users have still expressed usability concerns.
One problem is that in a lot of cases, you only care about e.g.
translation, so you end up with this:
```rust
gizmos.cross_2d(
Isometry2d::from_translation(Vec2::new(-160.0, 120.0)),
12.0,
FUCHSIA,
);
```
The isometry adds quite a lot of length and verbosity, and isn't really
that relevant since only the translation is important here.
It would be nice if you could use the translation directly, and only
supply an isometry if both translation and rotation are needed. This
would make the following possible:
```rust
gizmos.cross_2d(Vec2::new(-160.0, 120.0), 12.0, FUCHSIA);
```
removing a lot of verbosity.
## Solution
Implement `From<Vec2>` and `From<Rot2>` for `Isometry2d`, and
`From<Vec3>`, `From<Vec3A>`, and `From<Quat>` for `Isometry3d`. These
are lossless conversions that fit the semantics of `From`.
This makes the proposed API possible! The methods must now simply take
an `impl Into<IsometryNd>`, and this works:
```rust
gizmos.cross_2d(Vec2::new(-160.0, 120.0), 12.0, FUCHSIA);
```
# Objective
Yet another PR for migrating stuff to required components. This time,
cameras!
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposal](https://hackmd.io/tsYID4CGRiWxzsgawzxG_g#Combined-Proposal-1-Selected),
deprecate `Camera2dBundle` and `Camera3dBundle` in favor of `Camera2d`
and `Camera3d`.
Adding a `Camera` without `Camera2d` or `Camera3d` now logs a warning,
as suggested by Cart [on
Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1264881140007702558/1291506402832945273).
I would personally like cameras to work a bit differently and be split
into a few more components, to avoid some footguns and confusing
semantics, but that is more controversial, and shouldn't block this core
migration.
## Testing
I ran a few 2D and 3D examples, and tried cameras with and without
render graphs.
---
## Migration Guide
`Camera2dBundle` and `Camera3dBundle` have been deprecated in favor of
`Camera2d` and `Camera3d`. Inserting them will now also insert the other
components required by them automatically.
# Objective
A big step in the migration to required components: meshes and
materials!
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposal](https://hackmd.io/@bevy/required_components/%2Fj9-PnF-2QKK0on1KQ29UWQ):
- Deprecate `MaterialMesh2dBundle`, `MaterialMeshBundle`, and
`PbrBundle`.
- Add `Mesh2d` and `Mesh3d` components, which wrap a `Handle<Mesh>`.
- Add `MeshMaterial2d<M: Material2d>` and `MeshMaterial3d<M: Material>`,
which wrap a `Handle<M>`.
- Meshes *without* a mesh material should be rendered with a default
material. The existence of a material is determined by
`HasMaterial2d`/`HasMaterial3d`, which is required by
`MeshMaterial2d`/`MeshMaterial3d`. This gets around problems with the
generics.
Previously:
```rust
commands.spawn(MaterialMesh2dBundle {
mesh: meshes.add(Circle::new(100.0)).into(),
material: materials.add(Color::srgb(7.5, 0.0, 7.5)),
transform: Transform::from_translation(Vec3::new(-200., 0., 0.)),
..default()
});
```
Now:
```rust
commands.spawn((
Mesh2d(meshes.add(Circle::new(100.0))),
MeshMaterial2d(materials.add(Color::srgb(7.5, 0.0, 7.5))),
Transform::from_translation(Vec3::new(-200., 0., 0.)),
));
```
If the mesh material is missing, previously nothing was rendered. Now,
it renders a white default `ColorMaterial` in 2D and a
`StandardMaterial` in 3D (this can be overridden). Below, only every
other entity has a material:
Why white? This is still open for discussion, but I think white makes
sense for a *default* material, while *invalid* asset handles pointing
to nothing should have something like a pink material to indicate that
something is broken (I don't handle that in this PR yet). This is kind
of a mix of Godot and Unity: Godot just renders a white material for
non-existent materials, while Unity renders nothing when no materials
exist, but renders pink for invalid materials. I can also change the
default material to pink if that is preferable though.
## Testing
I ran some 2D and 3D examples to test if anything changed visually. I
have not tested all examples or features yet however. If anyone wants to
test more extensively, it would be appreciated!
## Implementation Notes
- The relationship between `bevy_render` and `bevy_pbr` is weird here.
`bevy_render` needs `Mesh3d` for its own systems, but `bevy_pbr` has all
of the material logic, and `bevy_render` doesn't depend on it. I feel
like the two crates should be refactored in some way, but I think that's
out of scope for this PR.
- I didn't migrate meshlets to required components yet. That can
probably be done in a follow-up, as this is already a huge PR.
- It is becoming increasingly clear to me that we really, *really* want
to disallow raw asset handles as components. They caused me a *ton* of
headache here already, and it took me a long time to find every place
that queried for them or inserted them directly on entities, since there
were no compiler errors for it. If we don't remove the `Component`
derive, I expect raw asset handles to be a *huge* footgun for users as
we transition to wrapper components, especially as handles as components
have been the norm so far. I personally consider this to be a blocker
for 0.15: we need to migrate to wrapper components for asset handles
everywhere, and remove the `Component` derive. Also see
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/14124.
---
## Migration Guide
Asset handles for meshes and mesh materials must now be wrapped in the
`Mesh2d` and `MeshMaterial2d` or `Mesh3d` and `MeshMaterial3d`
components for 2D and 3D respectively. Raw handles as components no
longer render meshes.
Additionally, `MaterialMesh2dBundle`, `MaterialMeshBundle`, and
`PbrBundle` have been deprecated. Instead, use the mesh and material
components directly.
Previously:
```rust
commands.spawn(MaterialMesh2dBundle {
mesh: meshes.add(Circle::new(100.0)).into(),
material: materials.add(Color::srgb(7.5, 0.0, 7.5)),
transform: Transform::from_translation(Vec3::new(-200., 0., 0.)),
..default()
});
```
Now:
```rust
commands.spawn((
Mesh2d(meshes.add(Circle::new(100.0))),
MeshMaterial2d(materials.add(Color::srgb(7.5, 0.0, 7.5))),
Transform::from_translation(Vec3::new(-200., 0., 0.)),
));
```
If the mesh material is missing, a white default material is now used.
Previously, nothing was rendered if the material was missing.
The `WithMesh2d` and `WithMesh3d` query filter type aliases have also
been removed. Simply use `With<Mesh2d>` or `With<Mesh3d>`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Tim Blackbird <justthecooldude@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# 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
- Solves the last bullet in and closes#14319
- Make better use of the `Isometry` types
- Prevent issues like #14655
- Probably simplify and clean up a lot of code through the use of Gizmos
as well (i.e. the 3D gizmos for cylinders circles & lines don't connect
well, probably due to wrong rotations)
## Solution
- go through the `bevy_gizmos` crate and give all methods a slight
workover
## Testing
- For all the changed examples I run `git switch main && cargo rr
--example <X> && git switch <BRANCH> && cargo rr --example <X>` and
compare the visual results
- Check if all doc tests are still compiling
- Check the docs in general and update them !!!
---
## Migration Guide
The gizmos methods function signature changes as follows:
- 2D
- if it took `position` & `rotation_angle` before ->
`Isometry2d::new(position, Rot2::radians(rotation_angle))`
- if it just took `position` before ->
`Isometry2d::from_translation(position)`
- 3D
- if it took `position` & `rotation` before ->
`Isometry3d::new(position, rotation)`
- if it just took `position` before ->
`Isometry3d::from_translation(position)`
# Objective
Previously, this area of bevy_math used raw translation and rotations to
encode isometries, which did not exist earlier. The goal of this PR is
to make the codebase of bevy_math more harmonious by using actual
isometries (`Isometry2d`/`Isometry3d`) in these places instead — this
will hopefully make the interfaces more digestible for end-users, in
addition to facilitating conversions.
For instance, together with the addition of #14478, this means that a
bounding box for a collider with an isometric `Transform` can be
computed as
```rust
collider.aabb_3d(collider_transform.to_isometry())
```
instead of using manual destructuring.
## Solution
- The traits `Bounded2d` and `Bounded3d` now use `Isometry2d` and
`Isometry3d` (respectively) instead of `translation` and `rotation`
parameters; e.g.:
```rust
/// A trait with methods that return 3D bounding volumes for a shape.
pub trait Bounded3d {
/// Get an axis-aligned bounding box for the shape translated and
rotated by the given isometry.
fn aabb_3d(&self, isometry: Isometry3d) -> Aabb3d;
/// Get a bounding sphere for the shape translated and rotated by the
given isometry.
fn bounding_sphere(&self, isometry: Isometry3d) -> BoundingSphere;
}
```
- Similarly, the `from_point_cloud` constructors for axis-aligned
bounding boxes and bounding circles/spheres now take isometries instead
of separate `translation` and `rotation`; e.g.:
```rust
/// Computes the smallest [`Aabb3d`] containing the given set of points,
/// transformed by the rotation and translation of the given isometry.
///
/// # Panics
///
/// Panics if the given set of points is empty.
#[inline(always)]
pub fn from_point_cloud(
isometry: Isometry3d,
points: impl Iterator<Item = impl Into<Vec3A>>,
) -> Aabb3d { //... }
```
This has a couple additional results:
1. The end-user no longer interacts directly with `Into<Vec3A>` or
`Into<Rot2>` parameters; these conversions all happen earlier now,
inside the isometry types.
2. Similarly, almost all intermediate `Vec3 -> Vec3A` conversions have
been eliminated from the `Bounded3d` implementations for primitives.
This probably has some performance benefit, but I have not measured it
as of now.
## Testing
Existing unit tests help ensure that nothing has been broken in the
refactor.
---
## Migration Guide
The `Bounded2d` and `Bounded3d` traits now take `Isometry2d` and
`Isometry3d` parameters (respectively) instead of separate translation
and rotation arguments. Existing calls to `aabb_2d`, `bounding_circle`,
`aabb_3d`, and `bounding_sphere` will have to be changed to use
isometries instead. A straightforward conversion is to refactor just by
calling `Isometry2d/3d::new`, as follows:
```rust
// Old:
let aabb = my_shape.aabb_2d(my_translation, my_rotation);
// New:
let aabb = my_shape.aabb_2d(Isometry2d::new(my_translation, my_rotation));
```
However, if the old translation and rotation are 3d
translation/rotations originating from a `Transform` or
`GlobalTransform`, then `to_isometry` may be used instead. For example:
```rust
// Old:
let bounding_sphere = my_shape.bounding_sphere(shape_transform.translation, shape_transform.rotation);
// New:
let bounding_sphere = my_shape.bounding_sphere(shape_transform.to_isometry());
```
This discussion also applies to the `from_point_cloud` construction
method of `Aabb2d`/`BoundingCircle`/`Aabb3d`/`BoundingSphere`, which has
similarly been altered to use isometries.
# Objective
Adopted #11748
## Solution
I've rebased on main to fix the merge conflicts. ~~Not quite ready to
merge yet~~
* Clippy is happy and the tests are passing, but...
* ~~The new shapes in `examples/2d/2d_shapes.rs` don't look right at
all~~ Never mind, looks like radians and degrees just got mixed up at
some point?
* I have updated one doc comment based on a review in the original PR.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alexis "spectria" Horizon <spectria.limina@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alexis "spectria" Horizon <118812919+spectria-limina@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Joona Aalto <jondolf.dev@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ben Harper <ben@tukom.org>
