bevy/crates/bevy_reflect
Gino Valente 379b9e5cb6
bevy_reflect: Split #[reflect(where)] (#11597)
# Objective

Revert the changes to type parameter bounds introduced in #9046,
improves the `#[reflect(where)]` attribute (also from #9046), and adds
the ability to opt out of field bounds.

This is based on suggestions by @soqb and discussion on
[Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1002362493634629796/1201227833826103427).

## Solution

Reverts the changes to type parameter bounds when deriving `Reflect`,
introduced in #9046. This was originally done as a means of fixing a
recursion issue (#8965). However, as @soqb pointed out, we could achieve
the same result by simply making an opt-out attribute instead of messing
with the type parameter bounds.

This PR has four main changes:
1. Reverts the type parameter bounds from #9046
2. Includes `TypePath` as a default bound for active fields
3. Changes `#reflect(where)]` to be strictly additive
4. Adds `#reflect(no_field_bounds)]` to opt out of field bounds

Change 1 means that, like before, type parameters only receive at most
the `TypePath` bound (if `#[reflect(type_path = false)]` is not present)
and active fields receive the `Reflect` or `FromReflect` bound. And with
Change 2, they will also receive `TypePath` (since it's indirectly
required by `Typed` to construct `NamedField` and `UnnamedField`
instances).

Change 3 was made to make room for Change 4. By splitting out the
responsibility of `#reflect(where)]`, we can use it with or without
`#reflect(no_field_bounds)]` for various use cases.

For example, if we hadn't done this, the following would have failed:

```rust
// Since we're not using `#reflect(no_field_bounds)]`, 
// `T::Assoc` is automatically given the required bounds
// of `FromReflect + TypePath`
#[derive(Reflect)]
#[reflect(where T::Assoc: OtherTrait)]
struct Foo<T: MyTrait> {
  value: T::Assoc,
}
```

This provides more flexibility to the user while still letting them add
or remove most trait bounds.

And to solve the original recursion issue, we can do:

```rust
#[derive(Reflect)]
#[reflect(no_field_bounds)] // <-- Added
struct Foo {
  foo: Vec<Foo>
}
```

#### Bounds

All in all, we now have four sets of trait bounds:
- `Self` gets the bounds `Any + Send + Sync`
- Type parameters get the bound `TypePath`. This can be opted out of
with `#[reflect(type_path = false)]`
- Active fields get the bounds `TypePath` and `FromReflect`/`Reflect`
bounds. This can be opted out of with `#reflect(no_field_bounds)]`
- Custom bounds can be added with `#[reflect(where)]`

---

## Changelog

- Revert some changes #9046
- `#reflect(where)]` is now strictly additive
- Added `#reflect(no_field_bounds)]` attribute to opt out of automatic
field trait bounds when deriving `Reflect`
- Made the `TypePath` requirement on fields when deriving `Reflect` more
explicit

## Migration Guide

> [!important]
> This PR shouldn't be a breaking change relative to the current version
of Bevy (v0.12). And since it removes the breaking parts of #9046, that
PR also won't need a migration guide.
2024-01-29 17:54:17 +00:00
..
bevy_reflect_derive bevy_reflect: Split #[reflect(where)] (#11597) 2024-01-29 17:54:17 +00:00
examples fix nightly clippy warnings (#6395) 2022-10-28 21:03:01 +00:00
src bevy_reflect: Split #[reflect(where)] (#11597) 2024-01-29 17:54:17 +00:00
Cargo.toml Derive PartialEq, Serialize, Deserialize and Reflect on primitives (#11514) 2024-01-28 14:55:30 +00:00
README.md add and fix shields in Readmes (#9993) 2023-10-15 00:52:31 +00:00

Bevy Reflect

License Crates.io Downloads Docs Discord

This crate enables you to dynamically interact with Rust types:

  • Derive the Reflect traits
  • Interact with fields using their names (for named structs) or indices (for tuple structs)
  • "Patch" your types with new values
  • Look up nested fields using "path strings"
  • Iterate over struct fields
  • Automatically serialize and deserialize via Serde (without explicit serde impls)
  • Trait "reflection"

Features

Derive the Reflect traits

// this will automatically implement the Reflect trait and the Struct trait (because the type is a struct)
#[derive(Reflect)]
struct Foo {
    a: u32,
    b: Bar,
    c: Vec<i32>,
    d: Vec<Baz>,
}

// this will automatically implement the Reflect trait and the TupleStruct trait (because the type is a tuple struct)
#[derive(Reflect)]
struct Bar(String);

#[derive(Reflect)]
struct Baz {
    value: f32,
}

// We will use this value to illustrate `bevy_reflect` features
let mut foo = Foo {
    a: 1,
    b: Bar("hello".to_string()),
    c: vec![1, 2],
    d: vec![Baz { value: 3.14 }],
};

Interact with fields using their names

assert_eq!(*foo.get_field::<u32>("a").unwrap(), 1);

*foo.get_field_mut::<u32>("a").unwrap() = 2;

assert_eq!(foo.a, 2);

"Patch" your types with new values

let mut dynamic_struct = DynamicStruct::default();
dynamic_struct.insert("a", 42u32);
dynamic_struct.insert("c", vec![3, 4, 5]);

foo.apply(&dynamic_struct);

assert_eq!(foo.a, 42);
assert_eq!(foo.c, vec![3, 4, 5]);

Look up nested fields using "path strings"

let value = *foo.get_path::<f32>("d[0].value").unwrap();
assert_eq!(value, 3.14);

Iterate over struct fields

for (i, value: &Reflect) in foo.iter_fields().enumerate() {
    let field_name = foo.name_at(i).unwrap();
    if let Some(value) = value.downcast_ref::<u32>() {
        println!("{} is a u32 with the value: {}", field_name, *value);
    }
}

Automatically serialize and deserialize via Serde (without explicit serde impls)

let mut registry = TypeRegistry::default();
registry.register::<u32>();
registry.register::<i32>();
registry.register::<f32>();
registry.register::<String>();
registry.register::<Bar>();
registry.register::<Baz>();

let serializer = ReflectSerializer::new(&foo, &registry);
let serialized = ron::ser::to_string_pretty(&serializer, ron::ser::PrettyConfig::default()).unwrap();

let mut deserializer = ron::de::Deserializer::from_str(&serialized).unwrap();
let reflect_deserializer = ReflectDeserializer::new(&registry);
let value = reflect_deserializer.deserialize(&mut deserializer).unwrap();
let dynamic_struct = value.take::<DynamicStruct>().unwrap();

assert!(foo.reflect_partial_eq(&dynamic_struct).unwrap());

Trait "reflection"

Call a trait on a given &dyn Reflect reference without knowing the underlying type!

#[derive(Reflect)]
#[reflect(DoThing)]
struct MyType {
    value: String,
}

impl DoThing for MyType {
    fn do_thing(&self) -> String {
        format!("{} World!", self.value)
    }
}

#[reflect_trait]
pub trait DoThing {
    fn do_thing(&self) -> String;
}

// First, lets box our type as a Box<dyn Reflect>
let reflect_value: Box<dyn Reflect> = Box::new(MyType {
    value: "Hello".to_string(),
});

// This means we no longer have direct access to MyType or its methods. We can only call Reflect methods on reflect_value.
// What if we want to call `do_thing` on our type? We could downcast using reflect_value.downcast_ref::<MyType>(), but what if we
// don't know the type at compile time?

// Normally in rust we would be out of luck at this point. Lets use our new reflection powers to do something cool!
let mut type_registry = TypeRegistry::default();
type_registry.register::<MyType>();

// The #[reflect] attribute we put on our DoThing trait generated a new `ReflectDoThing` struct, which implements TypeData.
// This was added to MyType's TypeRegistration.
let reflect_do_thing = type_registry
    .get_type_data::<ReflectDoThing>(reflect_value.type_id())
    .unwrap();

// We can use this generated type to convert our `&dyn Reflect` reference to a `&dyn DoThing` reference
let my_trait: &dyn DoThing = reflect_do_thing.get(&*reflect_value).unwrap();

// Which means we can now call do_thing(). Magic!
println!("{}", my_trait.do_thing());

// This works because the #[reflect(MyTrait)] we put on MyType informed the Reflect derive to insert a new instance
// of ReflectDoThing into MyType's registration. The instance knows how to cast &dyn Reflect to &dyn DoThing, because it
// knows that &dyn Reflect should first be downcasted to &MyType, which can then be safely casted to &dyn DoThing

Why make this?

The whole point of Rust is static safety! Why build something that makes it easy to throw it all away?

  • Some problems are inherently dynamic (scripting, some types of serialization / deserialization)
  • Sometimes the dynamic way is easier
  • Sometimes the dynamic way puts less burden on your users to derive a bunch of traits (this was a big motivator for the Bevy project)