# Objective
In the existing implementation, additive blending effectively treats the
node with least index specially by basically forcing its weight to be
`1.0` regardless of what its computed weight would be (based on the
weights in the `AnimationGraph` and `AnimationPlayer`).
Arguably this makes some amount of sense, because the "base" animation
is often one which was not authored to be used additively, meaning that
its sampled values are interpreted absolutely rather than as deltas.
However, this also leads to strange behavior with respect to animation
masks: if the "base" animation is masked out on some target, then the
next node is treated as the "base" animation, despite the fact that it
would normally be interpreted additively, and the weight of that
animation is thrown away as a result.
This is all kind of weird and revolves around special treatment (if the
behavior is even really intentional in the first place). From a
mathematical standpoint, there is nothing special about how the "base"
animation must be treated other than having a weight of 1.0 under an
`Add` node, which is something that the user can do without relying on
some bizarre corner-case behavior of the animation system — this is the
only present situation under which weights are discarded.
This PR changes this behavior so that the weight of every node is
incorporated. In other words, for an animation graph that looks like
this:
```text
┌───────────────┐
│Base clip ┼──┐
│ 0.5 │ │
└───────────────┘ │
┌───────────────┐ │ ┌───────────────┐ ┌────┐
│Additive clip 1┼──┼─►┤Additive blend ┼────►│Root│
│ 0.1 │ │ │ 1.0 │ └────┘
└───────────────┘ │ └───────────────┘
┌───────────────┐ │
│Additive clip 2┼──┘
│ 0.2 │
└───────────────┘
```
Previously, the result would have been
```text
base_clip + 0.1 * additive_clip_1 + 0.2 * additive_clip_2
```
whereas now it would be
```text
0.5 * base_clip + 0.1 * additive_clip_1 + 0.2 * additive_clip_2
```
and in the scenario where `base_clip` is masked out:
```text
additive_clip_1 + 0.2 * additive_clip_2
```
vs.
```text
0.1 * additive_clip_1 + 0.2 * additive_clip_2
```
## Solution
For background, the way that the additive blending procedure works is
something like this:
- During graph traversal, the node values and weights of the children
are pushed onto the evaluator `stack`. The traversal order guarantees
that the item with least node index will be on top.
- Once we reach the `Add` node itself, we start popping off the `stack`
and into the evaluator's `blend_register`, which is an accumulator
holding up to one weight-value pair:
- If the `blend_register` is empty, it is filled using data from the top
of the `stack`.
- Otherwise, the `blend_register` is combined with data popped from the
`stack` and updated.
In the example above, the additive blending steps would look like this
(with the pre-existing implementation):
1. The `blend_register` is empty, so we pop `(base_clip, 0.5)` from the
top of the `stack` and put it in. Now the value of the `blend_register`
is `(base_clip, 0.5)`.
2. The `blend_register` is non-empty: we pop `(additive_clip_1, 0.1)`
from the top of the `stack` and combine it additively with the value in
the `blend_register`, forming `(base_clip + 0.1 * additive_clip_1, 0.6)`
in the `blend_register` (the carried weight value goes unused).
3. The `blend_register` is non-empty: we pop `(additive_clip_2, 0.2)`
from the top of the `stack` and combine it additively with the value in
the `blend_register`, forming `(base_clip + 0.1 * additive_clip_1 + 0.2
* additive_clip_2, 0.8)` in the `blend_register`.
The solution in this PR changes step 1: the `base_clip` is multiplied by
its weight as it is added to the `blend_register` in the first place,
yielding `0.5 * base_clip + 0.1 * additive_clip_1 + 0.2 *
additive_clip_2` as the final result.
### Note for reviewers
It might be tempting to look at the code, which contains a segment that
looks like this:
```rust
if additive {
current_value = A::blend(
[
BlendInput {
weight: 1.0, // <--
value: current_value,
additive: true,
},
BlendInput {
weight: weight_to_blend,
value: value_to_blend,
additive: true,
},
]
.into_iter(),
);
}
```
and conclude that the explicit value of `1.0` is responsible for
overwriting the weight of the base animation. This is incorrect.
Rather, this additive blend has to be written this way because it is
multiplying the *existing value in the blend register* by 1 (i.e. not
doing anything) before adding the next value to it. Changing this to
another quantity (e.g. the existing weight) would cause the value in the
blend register to be spuriously multiplied down.
## Testing
Tested on `animation_masks` example. Checked `morph_weights` example as
well.
## Migration Guide
I will write a migration guide later if this change is not included in
0.15.
# Objective
Fixes#15995
## Solution
Corrects a mistake made during the example migration in #15591.
`AnimationControl` was meant to be on the parent, not the child. So the
query in `update_ui` was no longer matching.
## Testing
`cargo run --example animation_masks`
# Objective
Continue improving the user experience of our UI Node API in the
direction specified by [Bevy's Next Generation Scene / UI
System](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/14437)
## Solution
As specified in the document above, merge `Style` fields into `Node`,
and move "computed Node fields" into `ComputedNode` (I chose this name
over something like `ComputedNodeLayout` because it currently contains
more than just layout info. If we want to break this up / rename these
concepts, lets do that in a separate PR). `Style` has been removed.
This accomplishes a number of goals:
## Ergonomics wins
Specifying both `Node` and `Style` is now no longer required for
non-default styles
Before:
```rust
commands.spawn((
Node::default(),
Style {
width: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
},
));
```
After:
```rust
commands.spawn(Node {
width: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
});
```
## Conceptual clarity
`Style` was never a comprehensive "style sheet". It only defined "core"
style properties that all `Nodes` shared. Any "styled property" that
couldn't fit that mold had to be in a separate component. A "real" style
system would style properties _across_ components (`Node`, `Button`,
etc). We have plans to build a true style system (see the doc linked
above).
By moving the `Style` fields to `Node`, we fully embrace `Node` as the
driving concept and remove the "style system" confusion.
## Next Steps
* Consider identifying and splitting out "style properties that aren't
core to Node". This should not happen for Bevy 0.15.
---
## Migration Guide
Move any fields set on `Style` into `Node` and replace all `Style`
component usage with `Node`.
Before:
```rust
commands.spawn((
Node::default(),
Style {
width: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
},
));
```
After:
```rust
commands.spawn(Node {
width: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
});
```
For any usage of the "computed node properties" that used to live on
`Node`, use `ComputedNode` instead:
Before:
```rust
fn system(nodes: Query<&Node>) {
for node in &nodes {
let computed_size = node.size();
}
}
```
After:
```rust
fn system(computed_nodes: Query<&ComputedNode>) {
for computed_node in &computed_nodes {
let computed_size = computed_node.size();
}
}
```
# Objective
Cleanup naming and docs, add missing migration guide after #15591
All text root nodes now use `Text` (UI) / `Text2d`.
All text readers/writers use `Text<Type>Reader`/`Text<Type>Writer`
convention.
---
## Migration Guide
Doubles as #15591 migration guide.
Text bundles (`TextBundle` and `Text2dBundle`) were removed in favor of
`Text` and `Text2d`.
Shared configuration fields were replaced with `TextLayout`, `TextFont`
and `TextColor` components.
Just `TextBundle`'s additional field turned into `TextNodeFlags`
component,
while `Text2dBundle`'s additional fields turned into `TextBounds` and
`Anchor` components.
Text sections were removed in favor of hierarchy-based approach.
For root text entities with `Text` or `Text2d` components, child
entities with `TextSpan` will act as additional text sections.
To still access text spans by index, use the new `TextUiReader`,
`Text2dReader` and `TextUiWriter`, `Text2dWriter` system parameters.
# Objective
Currently text is recomputed unnecessarily on any changes to its color,
which is extremely expensive.
## Solution
Split up `TextStyle` into two separate components `TextFont` and
`TextColor`.
## Testing
I added this system to `many_buttons`:
```rust
fn set_text_colors_changed(mut colors: Query<&mut TextColor>) {
for mut text_color in colors.iter_mut() {
text_color.set_changed();
}
}
```
reports ~4fps on main, ~50fps with this PR.
## Migration Guide
`TextStyle` has been renamed to `TextFont` and its `color` field has
been moved to a separate component named `TextColor` which newtypes
`Color`.
**Ready for review. Examples migration progress: 100%.**
# Objective
- Implement https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/15014
## Solution
This implements [cart's
proposal](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/15014#discussioncomment-10574459)
faithfully except for one change. I separated `TextSpan` from
`TextSpan2d` because `TextSpan` needs to require the `GhostNode`
component, which is a `bevy_ui` component only usable by UI.
Extra changes:
- Added `EntityCommands::commands_mut` that returns a mutable reference.
This is a blocker for extension methods that return something other than
`self`. Note that `sickle_ui`'s `UiBuilder::commands` returns a mutable
reference for this reason.
## Testing
- [x] Text examples all work.
---
## Showcase
TODO: showcase-worthy
## Migration Guide
TODO: very breaking
### Accessing text spans by index
Text sections are now text sections on different entities in a
hierarchy, Use the new `TextReader` and `TextWriter` system parameters
to access spans by index.
Before:
```rust
fn refresh_text(mut query: Query<&mut Text, With<TimeText>>, time: Res<Time>) {
let text = query.single_mut();
text.sections[1].value = format_time(time.elapsed());
}
```
After:
```rust
fn refresh_text(
query: Query<Entity, With<TimeText>>,
mut writer: UiTextWriter,
time: Res<Time>
) {
let entity = query.single();
*writer.text(entity, 1) = format_time(time.elapsed());
}
```
### Iterating text spans
Text spans are now entities in a hierarchy, so the new `UiTextReader`
and `UiTextWriter` system parameters provide ways to iterate that
hierarchy. The `UiTextReader::iter` method will give you a normal
iterator over spans, and `UiTextWriter::for_each` lets you visit each of
the spans.
---------
Co-authored-by: ickshonpe <david.curthoys@googlemail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
- Closes#15717
## Solution
- Wrap the handle in a new wrapper component: `AnimationGraphHandle`.
## Testing
Searched for all instances of `AnimationGraph` in the examples and
updated and tested those
## Migration Guide
`Handle<AnimationGraph>` is no longer a component. Instead, use the
`AnimationGraphHandle` component which contains a
`Handle<AnimationGraph>`.
# 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.
*Additive blending* is an ubiquitous feature in game engines that allows
animations to be concatenated instead of blended. The canonical use case
is to allow a character to hold a weapon while performing arbitrary
poses. For example, if you had a character that needed to be able to
walk or run while attacking with a weapon, the typical workflow is to
have an additive blend node that combines walking and running animation
clips with an animation clip of one of the limbs performing a weapon
attack animation.
This commit adds support for additive blending to Bevy. It builds on top
of the flexible infrastructure in #15589 and introduces a new type of
node, the *add node*. Like blend nodes, add nodes combine the animations
of their children according to their weights. Unlike blend nodes,
however, add nodes don't normalize the weights to 1.0.
The `animation_masks` example has been overhauled to demonstrate the use
of additive blending in combination with masks. There are now controls
to choose an animation clip for every limb of the fox individually.
This patch also fixes a bug whereby masks were incorrectly accumulated
with `insert()` during the graph threading phase, which could cause
corruption of computed masks in some cases.
Note that the `clip` field has been replaced with an `AnimationNodeType`
enum, which breaks `animgraph.ron` files. The `Fox.animgraph.ron` asset
has been updated to the new format.
Closes#14395.
## Showcase
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/52dfe05f-fdb3-477a-9462-ec150f93df33
## Migration Guide
* The `animgraph.ron` format has changed to accommodate the new
*additive blending* feature. You'll need to change `clip` fields to
instances of the new `AnimationNodeType` enum.
# Objective
A step in the migration to required components: scenes!
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposal](https://hackmd.io/@bevy/required_components/%2FPJtNGVMMQhyM0zIvCJSkbA):
- Deprecate `SceneBundle` and `DynamicSceneBundle`.
- Add `SceneRoot` and `DynamicSceneRoot` components, which wrap a
`Handle<Scene>` and `Handle<DynamicScene>` respectively.
## Migration Guide
Asset handles for scenes and dynamic scenes must now be wrapped in the
`SceneRoot` and `DynamicSceneRoot` components. Raw handles as components
no longer spawn scenes.
Additionally, `SceneBundle` and `DynamicSceneBundle` have been
deprecated. Instead, use the scene components directly.
Previously:
```rust
let model_scene = asset_server.load(GltfAssetLabel::Scene(0).from_asset("model.gltf"));
commands.spawn(SceneBundle {
scene: model_scene,
transform: Transform::from_xyz(-4.0, 0.0, -3.0),
..default()
});
```
Now:
```rust
let model_scene = asset_server.load(GltfAssetLabel::Scene(0).from_asset("model.gltf"));
commands.spawn((
SceneRoot(model_scene),
Transform::from_xyz(-4.0, 0.0, -3.0),
));
```
# 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
Another step in the migration to required components: lights!
Note that this does not include `EnvironmentMapLight` or reflection
probes yet, because their API hasn't been fully chosen yet.
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposals](https://hackmd.io/@bevy/required_components/%2FLLnzwz9XTxiD7i2jiUXkJg):
- Deprecate `PointLightBundle` in favor of the `PointLight` component
- Deprecate `SpotLightBundle` in favor of the `PointLight` component
- Deprecate `DirectionalLightBundle` in favor of the `DirectionalLight`
component
## Testing
I ran some examples with lights.
---
## Migration Guide
`PointLightBundle`, `SpotLightBundle`, and `DirectionalLightBundle` have
been deprecated. Use the `PointLight`, `SpotLight`, and
`DirectionalLight` components instead. Adding them will now insert the
other components required by them automatically.
# Objective
Thought I had found all of these... noticed some `10px` in #15013 and
did another sweep.
Continuation of #8478, #13583.
## Solution
- Position example text (and other elements) 12px from the edge of the
screen
This commit adds support for *masks* to the animation graph. A mask is a
set of animation targets (bones) that neither a node nor its descendants
are allowed to animate. Animation targets can be assigned one or more
*mask group*s, which are specific to a single graph. If a node masks out
any mask group that an animation target belongs to, animation curves for
that target will be ignored during evaluation.
The canonical use case for masks is to support characters holding
objects. Typically, character animations will contain hand animations in
the case that the character's hand is empty. (For example, running
animations may close a character's fingers into a fist.) However, when
the character is holding an object, the animation must be altered so
that the hand grips the object.
Bevy currently has no convenient way to handle this. The only workaround
that I can see is to have entirely separate animation clips for
characters' hands and bodies and keep them in sync, which is burdensome
and doesn't match artists' expectations from other engines, which all
effectively have support for masks. However, with mask group support,
this task is simple. We assign each hand to a mask group and parent all
character animations to a node. When a character grasps an object in
hand, we position the fingers as appropriate and then enable the mask
group for that hand in that node. This allows the character's animations
to run normally, while the object remains correctly attached to the
hand.
Note that even with this PR, we won't have support for running separate
animations for a character's hand and the rest of the character. This is
because we're missing additive blending: there's no way to combine the
two masked animations together properly. I intend that to be a follow-up
PR.
The major engines all have support for masks, though the workflow varies
from engine to engine:
* Unity has support for masks [essentially as implemented here], though
with layers instead of a tree. However, when using the Mecanim
("Humanoid") feature, precise control over bones is lost in favor of
predefined muscle groups.
* Unreal has a feature named [*layered blend per bone*]. This allows for
separate blend weights for different bones, effectively achieving masks.
I believe that the combination of blend nodes and masks make Bevy's
animation graph as expressible as that of Unreal, once we have support
for additive blending, though you may have to use more nodes than you
would in Unreal. Moreover, separating out the concepts of "blend weight"
and "which bones this node applies to" seems like a cleaner design than
what Unreal has.
* Godot's `AnimationTree` has the notion of [*blend filters*], which are
essentially the same as masks as implemented in this PR.
Additionally, this patch fixes a bug with weight evaluation whereby
weights weren't properly propagated down to grandchildren, because the
weight evaluation for a node only checked its parent's weight, not its
evaluated weight. I considered submitting this as a separate PR, but
given that this PR refactors that code entirely to support masks and
weights under a unified "evaluated node" concept, I simply included the
fix here.
A new example, `animation_masks`, has been added. It demonstrates how to
toggle masks on and off for specific portions of a skin.
This is part of #14395, but I'm going to defer closing that issue until
we have additive blending.
[essentially as implemented here]:
https://docs.unity3d.com/560/Documentation/Manual/class-AvatarMask.html
[*layered blend per bone*]:
https://dev.epicgames.com/documentation/en-us/unreal-engine/using-layered-animations-in-unreal-engine
[*blend filters*]:
https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/tutorials/animation/animation_tree.html
## Migration Guide
* The serialized format of animation graphs has changed with the
addition of animation masks. To upgrade animation graph RON files, add
`mask` and `mask_groups` fields as appropriate. (They can be safely set
to zero.)
