custom
230 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
François Mockers
|
383b351045 | chore: Release | ||
|
Jordan Dominion
|
6826676e41 |
Fix macro pollution in SystemParam derive (#19155)
# Objective Fixes #19130 ## Solution Fully quality `Result::Ok` so as to not accidentally invoke the anyhow function of the same name ## Testing Tested on this minimal repro with and without change. main.rs ```rs use anyhow::Ok; use bevy::ecs::system::SystemParam; #[derive(SystemParam)] pub struct SomeParams; fn main() { } ``` Cargo.toml ```toml [package] name = "bevy-playground" version = "0.1.0" edition = "2024" [dependencies] anyhow = "1.0.98" bevy = { path = "../bevy" } ``` |
||
|
François Mockers
|
e9418b3845 | Release 0.16.0 | ||
|
François Mockers
|
608f902d1a | Release 0.16.0-rc.5 | ||
|
François Mockers
|
c4b3d75b46 | Release 0.16.0-rc.4 | ||
|
Chris Russell
|
ed28b5ccf7 |
Improve error message for missing events (#18683)
# Objective Improve the parameter validation error message for `Event(Reader|Writer|Mutator)`. System parameters defined using `#[derive(SystemParam)]`, including the parameters for events, currently propagate the validation errors from their subparameters. The error includes the type of the failing parameter, so the resulting error includes the type of the failing subparameter instead of the derived parameter. In particular, `EventReader<T>` will report an error from a `Res<Events<T>>`, even though the user has no parameter of that type! This is a follow-up to #18593. ## Solution Have `#[derive]`d system parameters map errors during propagation so that they report the outer parameter type. To continue to provide context, add a field to `SystemParamValidationError` that identifies the subparameter by name, and is empty for non-`#[derive]`d parameters. Allow them to override the failure message for individual parameters. Use this to convert "Resource does not exist" to "Event not initialized" for `Event(Reader|Writer|Mutator)`. ## Showcase The validation error for a `EventReader<SomeEvent>` parameter when `add_event` has not been called changes from: Before: ``` Parameter `Res<Events<SomeEvent>>` failed validation: Resource does not exist ``` After ``` Parameter `EventReader<SomeEvent>::events` failed validation: Event not initialized ``` |
||
|
François Mockers
|
bdfd7a3443 | Release 0.16.0-rc.3 | ||
|
krunchington
|
96d5f1e5de |
Fix relationship macro for multiple named members fields (#18530)
# Objective Fixes #18466 ## Solution Updated the macro generation pattern to place the comma in the correct place in the pattern. ## Testing - Tried named and unnamed fields in combination, and used rust expand macro tooling to see the generated code and verify its correctness (see screenshots in example below) --- ## Showcase Screenshot showing expanded macro with multiple named fields  Screenshot showing expanded macro with single unnamed field  ## Migration Guide n/a |
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
1a6b480ba2 |
Required Components: pass through all tokens in {} and () syntax (#18578)
# Objective #18555 added improved require syntax, but inline structs didn't support `..Default::default()` syntax (for technical reasons we can't parse the struct directly, so there is manual logic that missed this case). ## Solution When a `{}` or `()` section is encountered for a required component, rather than trying to parse the fields directly, just pass _all_ of the tokens through. This ensures no tokens are dropped, protects us against any future syntax changes, and optimizes our parsing logic (as we're dropping the field parsing logic entirely). |
||
|
François Mockers
|
1f44b56310 | Release 0.16.0-rc.2 | ||
|
Carter Anderson
|
f647482237 |
Improved Require Syntax (#18555)
# Objective Requires are currently more verbose than they need to be. People would like to define inline component values. Additionally, the current `#[require(Foo(custom_constructor))]` and `#[require(Foo(|| Foo(10))]` syntax doesn't really make sense within the context of the Rust type system. #18309 was an attempt to improve ergonomics for some cases, but it came at the cost of even more weirdness / unintuitive behavior. Our approach as a whole needs a rethink. ## Solution Rework the `#[require()]` syntax to make more sense. This is a breaking change, but I think it will make the system easier to learn, while also improving ergonomics substantially: ```rust #[derive(Component)] #[require( A, // this will use A::default() B(1), // inline tuple-struct value C { value: 1 }, // inline named-struct value D::Variant, // inline enum variant E::SOME_CONST, // inline associated const F::new(1), // inline constructor G = returns_g(), // an expression that returns G H = SomethingElse::new(), // expression returns SomethingElse, where SomethingElse: Into<H> )] struct Foo; ``` ## Migration Guide Custom-constructor requires should use the new expression-style syntax: ```rust // before #[derive(Component)] #[require(A(returns_a))] struct Foo; // after #[derive(Component)] #[require(A = returns_a())] struct Foo; ``` Inline-closure-constructor requires should use the inline value syntax where possible: ```rust // before #[derive(Component)] #[require(A(|| A(10))] struct Foo; // after #[derive(Component)] #[require(A(10)] struct Foo; ``` In cases where that is not possible, use the expression-style syntax: ```rust // before #[derive(Component)] #[require(A(|| A(10))] struct Foo; // after #[derive(Component)] #[require(A = A(10)] struct Foo; ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: François Mockers <mockersf@gmail.com> |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
765e5842cd |
Replace ValidationOutcome with Result (#18541)
# Objective Make it easier to short-circuit system parameter validation. Simplify the API surface by combining `ValidationOutcome` with `SystemParamValidationError`. ## Solution Replace `ValidationOutcome` with `Result<(), SystemParamValidationError>`. Move the docs from `ValidationOutcome` to `SystemParamValidationError`. Add a `skipped` field to `SystemParamValidationError` to distinguish the `Skipped` and `Invalid` variants. Use the `?` operator to short-circuit validation in tuples of system params. |
||
|
Alice Cecile
|
6caa1782d6 |
Define system param validation on a per-system parameter basis (#18504)
# Objective
When introduced, `Single` was intended to simply be silently skipped,
allowing for graceful and efficient handling of systems during invalid
game states (such as when the player is dead).
However, this also caused missing resources to *also* be silently
skipped, leading to confusing and very hard to debug failures. In
0.15.1, this behavior was reverted to a panic, making missing resources
easier to debug, but largely making `Single` (and `Populated`)
worthless, as they would panic during expected game states.
Ultimately, the consensus is that this behavior should differ on a
per-system-param basis. However, there was no sensible way to *do* that
before this PR.
## Solution
Swap `SystemParam::validate_param` from a `bool` to:
```rust
/// The outcome of system / system param validation,
/// used by system executors to determine what to do with a system.
pub enum ValidationOutcome {
/// All system parameters were validated successfully and the system can be run.
Valid,
/// At least one system parameter failed validation, and an error must be handled.
/// By default, this will result in1 a panic. See [crate::error] for more information.
///
/// This is the default behavior, and is suitable for system params that should *always* be valid,
/// either because sensible fallback behavior exists (like [`Query`] or because
/// failures in validation should be considered a bug in the user's logic that must be immediately addressed (like [`Res`]).
Invalid,
/// At least one system parameter failed validation, but the system should be skipped due to [`ValidationBehavior::Skip`].
/// This is suitable for system params that are intended to only operate in certain application states, such as [`Single`].
Skipped,
}
```
Then, inside of each `SystemParam` implementation, return either Valid,
Invalid or Skipped.
Currently, only `Single`, `Option<Single>` and `Populated` use the
`Skipped` behavior. Other params (like resources) retain their current
failing
## Testing
Messed around with the fallible_params example. Added a pair of tests:
one for panicking when resources are missing, and another for properly
skipping `Single` and `Populated` system params.
## To do
- [x] get https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/18454 merged
- [x] fix the todo!() in the macro-powered tuple implementation (please
help 🥺)
- [x] test
- [x] write a migration guide
- [x] update the example comments
## Migration Guide
Various system and system parameter validation methods
(`SystemParam::validate_param`, `System::validate_param` and
`System::validate_param_unsafe`) now return and accept a
`ValidationOutcome` enum, rather than a `bool`. The previous `true`
values map to `ValidationOutcome::Valid`, while `false` maps to
`ValidationOutcome::Invalid`.
However, if you wrote a custom schedule executor, you should now respect
the new `ValidationOutcome::Skipped` parameter, skipping any systems
whose validation was skipped. By contrast, `ValidationOutcome::Invalid`
systems should also be skipped, but you should call the
`default_error_handler` on them first, which by default will result in a
panic.
If you are implementing a custom `SystemParam`, you should consider
whether failing system param validation is an error or an expected
state, and choose between `Invalid` and `Skipped` accordingly. In Bevy
itself, `Single` and `Populated` now once again skip the system when
their conditions are not met. This is the 0.15.0 behavior, but stands in
contrast to the 0.15.1 behavior, where they would panic.
---------
Co-authored-by: MiniaczQ <xnetroidpl@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Dmytro Banin <banind@cs.washington.edu>
Co-authored-by: Chris Russell <8494645+chescock@users.noreply.github.com>
|
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
1db1119819 |
Replace VisitEntities with MapEntities (#18432)
# Objective There are currently too many disparate ways to handle entity mapping, especially after #17687. We now have MapEntities, VisitEntities, VisitEntitiesMut, Component::visit_entities, Component::visit_entities_mut. Our only known use case at the moment for these is entity mapping. This means we have significant consolidation potential. Additionally, VisitEntitiesMut cannot be implemented for map-style collections like HashSets, as you cant "just" mutate a `&mut Entity`. Our current approach to Component mapping requires VisitEntitiesMut, meaning this category of entity collection isn't mappable. `MapEntities` is more generally applicable. Additionally, the _existence_ of the blanket From impl on VisitEntitiesMut blocks us from implementing MapEntities for HashSets (or any types we don't own), because the owner could always add a conflicting impl in the future. ## Solution Use `MapEntities` everywhere and remove all "visit entities" usages. * Add `Component::map_entities` * Remove `Component::visit_entities`, `Component::visit_entities_mut`, `VisitEntities`, and `VisitEntitiesMut` * Support deriving `Component::map_entities` in `#[derive(Coomponent)]` * Add `#[derive(MapEntities)]`, and share logic with the `Component::map_entities` derive. * Add `ComponentCloneCtx::queue_deferred`, which is command-like logic that runs immediately after normal clones. Reframe `FromWorld` fallback logic in the "reflect clone" impl to use it. This cuts out a lot of unnecessary work and I think justifies the existence of a pseudo-command interface (given how niche, yet performance sensitive this is). Note that we no longer auto-impl entity mapping for ` IntoIterator<Item = &'a Entity>` types, as this would block our ability to implement cases like `HashMap`. This means the onus is on us (or type authors) to add explicit support for types that should be mappable. Also note that the Component-related changes do not require a migration guide as there hasn't been a release with them yet. ## Migration Guide If you were previously implementing `VisitEntities` or `VisitEntitiesMut` (likely via a derive), instead use `MapEntities`. Those were almost certainly used in the context of Bevy Scenes or reflection via `ReflectMapEntities`. If you have a case that uses `VisitEntities` or `VisitEntitiesMut` directly, where `MapEntities` is not a viable replacement, please let us know! ```rust // before #[derive(VisitEntities, VisitEntitiesMut)] struct Inventory { items: Vec<Entity>, #[visit_entities(ignore)] label: String, } // after #[derive(MapEntities)] struct Inventory { #[entities] items: Vec<Entity>, label: String, } ``` |
||
|
Wuketuke
|
baca78b565 |
Required components accept const values (#16720) (#18309)
# Objective
Const values should be more ergonomic to insert, since this is too
verbose
``` rust
#[derive(Component)]
#[require(
LockedAxes(||LockedAxes::ROTATION_LOCKED),
)]
pub struct CharacterController;
```
instead, users can now abbreviate that nonsense like this
``` rust
#[derive(Component)]
#[require(
LockedAxes = ROTATION_LOCKED),
)]
pub struct CharacterController;
```
it also works for enum labels.
I chose to omit the type, since were trying to reduce typing here. The
alternative would have been this:
```rust
#[require(
LockedAxes = LockedAxes::ROTATION_LOCKED),
)]
```
This of course has its disadvantages, since the const has to be
associated, but the old closure method is still possible, so I dont
think its a problem.
- Fixes #16720
## Testing
I added one new test in the docs, which also explain the new change. I
also saw that the docs for the required components on line 165 was
missing an assertion, so I added it back in
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
|
||
|
François Mockers
|
920515adab | Release 0.16.0-rc.1 | ||
|
Eagster
|
246ce590e5
|
Queued component registration (#18173)
# Objective This is an alternative to #17871 and #17701 for tracking issue #18155. This thanks to @maniwani for help with this design. The goal is to enable component ids to be reserved from multiple threads concurrently and with only `&World`. This contributes to assets as entities, read-only query and system parameter initialization, etc. ## What's wrong with #17871 ? In #17871, I used my proposed staging utilities to allow *fully* registering components from any thread concurrently with only `&Components`. However, if we want to pursue components as entities (which is desirable for a great many reasons. See [here](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/692572690833473578/1346499196655505534) on discord), this staging isn't going to work. After all, if registering a component requires spawning an entity, and spawning an entity requires `&mut World`, it is impossible to register a component fully with only `&World`. ## Solution But what if we don't have to register it all the way? What if it's enough to just know the `ComponentId` it will have once it is registered and to queue it to be registered at a later time? Spoiler alert: That is all we need for these features. Here's the basic design: Queue a registration: 1. Check if it has already been registered. 2. Check if it has already been queued. 3. Reserve a `ComponentId`. 4. Queue the registration at that id. Direct (normal) registration: 1. Check if this registration has been queued. 2. If it has, use the queued registration instead. 3. Otherwise, proceed like normal. Appllying the queue: 1. Pop queued items off one by one. 2. Register them directly. One other change: The whole point of this design over #17871 is to facilitate coupling component registration with the World. To ensure that this would fully work with that, I went ahead and moved the `ComponentId` generator onto the world itself. That stemmed a couple of minor organizational changes (see migration guide). As we do components as entities, we will replace this generator with `Entities`, which lives on `World` too. Doing this move early let me verify the design and will reduce migration headaches in the future. If components as entities is as close as I think it is, I don't think splitting this up into different PRs is worth it. If it is not as close as it is, it might make sense to still do #17871 in the meantime (see the risks section). I'll leave it up to y'all what we end up doing though. ## Risks and Testing The biggest downside of this compared to #17871 is that now we have to deal with correct but invalid `ComponentId`s. They are invalid because the component still isn't registered, but they are correct because, once registered, the component will have exactly that id. However, the only time this becomes a problem is if some code violates safety rules by queuing a registration and using the returned id as if it was valid. As this is a new feature though, nothing in Bevy does this, so no new tests were added for it. When we do use it, I left detailed docs to help mitigate issues here, and we can test those usages. Ex: we will want some tests on using queries initialized from queued registrations. ## Migration Guide Component registration can now be queued with only `&World`. To facilitate this, a few APIs needed to be moved around. The following functions have moved from `Components` to `ComponentsRegistrator`: - `register_component` - `register_component_with_descriptor` - `register_resource_with_descriptor` - `register_non_send` - `register_resource` - `register_required_components_manual` Accordingly, functions in `Bundle` and `Component` now take `ComponentsRegistrator` instead of `Components`. You can obtain `ComponentsRegistrator` from the new `World::components_registrator`. You can obtain `ComponentsQueuedRegistrator` from the new `World::components_queue`, and use it to stage component registration if desired. # Open Question Can we verify that it is enough to queue registration with `&World`? I don't think it would be too difficult to package this up into a `Arc<MyComponentsManager>` type thing if we need to, but keeping this on `&World` certainly simplifies things. If we do need the `Arc`, we'll need to look into partitioning `Entities` for components as entities, so we can keep most of the allocation fast on `World` and only keep a smaller partition in the `Arc`. I'd love an SME on assets as entities to shed some light on this. --------- Co-authored-by: andriyDev <andriydzikh@gmail.com> |
||
|
Tim Overbeek
|
664000f848
|
Improve derive(Event) and simplify macro code (#18083)
# Objective simplify some code and improve Event macro Closes https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/14336, # Showcase you can now write derive Events like so ```rust #[derive(event)] #[event(auto_propagate, traversal = MyType)] struct MyEvent; ``` |
||
|
RobWalt
|
a85a3a2a15
|
allow Call and Closure expressions in hook macro attributes (#18017)
# Objective
This PR adds:
- function call hook attributes `#[component(on_add = func(42))]`
- main feature of this commit
- closure hook attributes `#[component(on_add = |w, ctx| { /* ... */
})]`
- maybe too verbose
- but was easy to add
- was suggested on discord
This allows to reuse common functionality without replicating a lot of
boilerplate. A small example is a hook which just adds different default
sprites. The sprite loading code would be the same for every component.
Unfortunately we can't use the required components feature, since we
need at least an `AssetServer` or other `Resource`s or `Component`s to
load the sprite.
```rs
fn load_sprite(path: &str) -> impl Fn(DeferredWorld, HookContext) {
|mut world, ctx| {
// ... use world to load sprite
}
}
#[derive(Component)]
#[component(on_add = load_sprite("knight.png"))]
struct Knight;
#[derive(Component)]
#[component(on_add = load_sprite("monster.png"))]
struct Monster;
```
---
The commit also reorders the logic of the derive macro a bit. It's
probably a bit less lazy now, but the functionality shouldn't be
performance critical and is executed at compile time anyways.
## Solution
- Introduce `HookKind` enum in the component proc macro module
- extend parsing to allow more cases of expressions
## Testing
I have some code laying around. I'm not sure where to put it yet though.
Also is there a way to check compilation failures? Anyways, here it is:
```rs
use bevy::prelude::*;
#[derive(Component)]
#[component(
on_add = fooing_and_baring,
on_insert = fooing_and_baring,
on_replace = fooing_and_baring,
on_despawn = fooing_and_baring,
on_remove = fooing_and_baring
)]
pub struct FooPath;
fn fooing_and_baring(
world: bevy::ecs::world::DeferredWorld,
ctx: bevy::ecs::component::HookContext,
) {
}
#[derive(Component)]
#[component(
on_add = baring_and_bazzing("foo"),
on_insert = baring_and_bazzing("foo"),
on_replace = baring_and_bazzing("foo"),
on_despawn = baring_and_bazzing("foo"),
on_remove = baring_and_bazzing("foo")
)]
pub struct FooCall;
fn baring_and_bazzing(
path: &str,
) -> impl Fn(bevy::ecs::world::DeferredWorld, bevy::ecs::component::HookContext) {
|world, ctx| {}
}
#[derive(Component)]
#[component(
on_add = |w,ctx| {},
on_insert = |w,ctx| {},
on_replace = |w,ctx| {},
on_despawn = |w,ctx| {},
on_remove = |w,ctx| {}
)]
pub struct FooClosure;
#[derive(Component, Debug)]
#[relationship(relationship_target = FooTargets)]
#[component(
on_add = baring_and_bazzing("foo"),
// on_insert = baring_and_bazzing("foo"),
// on_replace = baring_and_bazzing("foo"),
on_despawn = baring_and_bazzing("foo"),
on_remove = baring_and_bazzing("foo")
)]
pub struct FooTargetOf(Entity);
#[derive(Component, Debug)]
#[relationship_target(relationship = FooTargetOf)]
#[component(
on_add = |w,ctx| {},
on_insert = |w,ctx| {},
// on_replace = |w,ctx| {},
// on_despawn = |w,ctx| {},
on_remove = |w,ctx| {}
)]
pub struct FooTargets(Vec<Entity>);
// MSG: mismatched types expected fn pointer `for<'w> fn(bevy::bevy_ecs::world::DeferredWorld<'w>, bevy::bevy_ecs::component::HookContext)` found struct `Bar`
//
// pub struct Bar;
// #[derive(Component)]
// #[component(
// on_add = Bar,
// )]
// pub struct FooWrongPath;
// MSG: this function takes 1 argument but 2 arguements were supplied
//
// #[derive(Component)]
// #[component(
// on_add = wrong_bazzing("foo"),
// )]
// pub struct FooWrongCall;
//
// fn wrong_bazzing(path: &str) -> impl Fn(bevy::ecs::world::DeferredWorld) {
// |world| {}
// }
// MSG: expected 1 argument, found 2
//
// #[derive(Component)]
// #[component(
// on_add = |w| {},
// )]
// pub struct FooWrongCall;
```
---
## Showcase
I'll try to continue to work on this to have a small section in the
release notes.
|
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
06cb5c5fd9
|
Fix Component require() IDE integration (#18165)
# Objective Component `require()` IDE integration is fully broken, as of #16575. ## Solution This reverts us back to the previous "put the docs on Component trait" impl. This _does_ reduce the accessibility of the required components in rust docs, but the complete erasure of "required component IDE experience" is not worth the price of slightly increased prominence of requires in docs. Additionally, Rust Analyzer has recently started including derive attributes in suggestions, so we aren't losing that benefit of the proc_macro attribute impl. |
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
a530c07bc5
|
Preserve spawned RelationshipTarget order and other improvements (#17858)
Fixes #17720 ## Objective Spawning RelationshipTargets from scenes currently fails to preserve RelationshipTarget ordering (ex: `Children` has an arbitrary order). This is because it uses the normal hook flow to set up the collection, which means we are pushing onto the collection in _spawn order_ (which is currently in archetype order, which will often produce mismatched orderings). We need to preserve the ordering in the original RelationshipTarget collection. Ideally without expensive checking / fixups. ## Solution One solution would be to spawn in hierarchy-order. However this gets complicated as there can be multiple hierarchies, and it also means we can't spawn in more cache-friendly orders (ex: the current per-archetype spawning, or future even-smarter per-table spawning). Additionally, same-world cloning has _slightly_ more nuanced needs (ex: recursively clone linked relationships, while maintaining _original_ relationships outside of the tree via normal hooks). The preferred approach is to directly spawn the remapped RelationshipTarget collection, as this trivially preserves the ordering. Unfortunately we can't _just_ do that, as when we spawn the children with their Relationships (ex: `ChildOf`), that will insert a duplicate. We could "fixup" the collection retroactively by just removing the back half of duplicates, but this requires another pass / more lookups / allocating twice as much space. Additionally, it becomes complicated because observers could insert additional children, making it harder (aka more expensive) to determine which children are dupes and which are not. The path I chose is to support "opting out" of the relationship target hook in the contexts that need that, as this allows us to just cheaply clone the mapped collection. The relationship hook can look for this configuration when it runs and skip its logic when that happens. A "simple" / small-amount-of-code way to do this would be to add a "skip relationship spawn" flag to World. Sadly, any hook / observer that runs _as the result of an insert_ would also read this flag. We really need a way to scope this setting to a _specific_ insert. Therefore I opted to add a new `RelationshipInsertHookMode` enum and an `entity.insert_with_relationship_insert_hook_mode` variant. Obviously this is verbose and ugly. And nobody wants _more_ insert variants. But sadly this was the best I could come up with from a performance and capability perspective. If you have alternatives let me know! There are three variants: 1. `RelationshipInsertHookMode::Run`: always run relationship insert hooks (this is the default) 2. `RelationshipInsertHookMode::Skip`: do not run any relationship insert hooks for this insert (this is used by spawner code) 3. `RelationshipInsertHookMode::RunIfNotLinked`: only run hooks for _unlinked_ relationships (this is used in same-world recursive entity cloning to preserve relationships outside of the deep-cloned tree) Note that I have intentionally only added "insert with relationship hook mode" variants to the cases we absolutely need (everything else uses the default `Run` mode), just to keep the code size in check. I do not think we should add more without real _very necessary_ use cases. I also made some other minor tweaks: 1. I split out `SourceComponent` from `ComponentCloneCtx`. Reading the source component no longer needlessly blocks mutable access to `ComponentCloneCtx`. 2. Thanks to (1), I've removed the `RefCell` wrapper over the cloned component queue. 3. (1) also allowed me to write to the EntityMapper while queuing up clones, meaning we can reserve entities during the component clone and write them to the mapper _before_ inserting the component, meaning cloned collections can be mapped on insert. 4. I've removed the closure from `write_target_component_ptr` to simplify the API / make it compatible with the split `SourceComponent` approach. 5. I've renamed `EntityCloner::recursive` to `EntityCloner::linked_cloning` to connect that feature more directly with `RelationshipTarget::LINKED_SPAWN` 6. I've removed `EntityCloneBehavior::RelationshipTarget`. This was always intended to be temporary, and this new behavior removes the need for it. --------- Co-authored-by: Viktor Gustavsson <villor94@gmail.com> |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
1f6642df4c
|
Fix unsound query transmutes on queries obtained from Query::as_readonly() (#17973)
# Objective
Fix unsound query transmutes on queries obtained from
`Query::as_readonly()`.
The following compiles, and the call to `transmute_lens()` should panic,
but does not:
```rust
fn bad_system(query: Query<&mut A>) {
let mut readonly = query.as_readonly();
let mut lens: QueryLens<&mut A> = readonly.transmute_lens();
let other_readonly: Query<&A> = query.as_readonly();
// `lens` and `other_readonly` alias, and are both alive here!
}
```
To make `Query::as_readonly()` zero-cost, we pointer-cast
`&QueryState<D, F>` to `&QueryState<D::ReadOnly, F>`. This means that
the `component_access` for a read-only query's state may include
accesses for the original mutable version, but the `Query` does not have
exclusive access to those components! `transmute` and `join` use that
access to ensure that a join is valid, and will incorrectly allow a
transmute that includes mutable access.
As a bonus, allow `Query::join`s that output `FilteredEntityRef` or
`FilteredEntityMut` to receive access from the `other` query. Currently
they only receive access from `self`.
## Solution
When transmuting or joining from a read-only query, remove any writes
before performing checking that the transmute is valid. For joins, be
sure to handle the case where one input query was the result of
`as_readonly()` but the other has valid mutable access.
This requires identifying read-only queries, so add a
`QueryData::IS_READ_ONLY` associated constant. Note that we only call
`QueryState::as_transmuted_state()` with `NewD: ReadOnlyQueryData`, so
checking for read-only queries is sufficient to check for
`as_transmuted_state()`.
Removing writes requires allocating a new `FilteredAccess`, so only do
so if the query is read-only and the state has writes. Otherwise, the
existing access is correct and we can continue using a reference to it.
Use the new read-only state to call `NewD::set_access`, so that
transmuting to a `FilteredAccessMut` results in a read-only
`FilteredAccessMut`. Otherwise, it would take the original write access,
and then the transmute would panic because it had too much access.
Note that `join` was previously passing `self.component_access` to
`NewD::set_access`. Switching it to `joined_component_access` also
allows a join that outputs `FilteredEntity(Ref|Mut)` to receive access
from `other`. The fact that it didn't do that before seems like an
oversight, so I didn't try to prevent that change.
## Testing
Added unit tests with the unsound transmute and join.
|
||
|
Tim Overbeek
|
173680944f
|
fix generics for relationships (#18136)
# Objective Allow Relationship to be derived for structs with generics. fixes #18133 ## Solution "X" inside #[relationship_target(relationship = X)] was previously parsed as Idents, now they are parsed as syn::Type ## Testing ```rust #[derive(Component)] #[relationship(relationship_target = Attachments<T>)] pub struct AttachedTo<T: Send + Sync + 'static> { #[relationship] pub entity: Entity, pub marker: PhantomData<T>, } #[derive(Component)] #[relationship_target(relationship = AttachedTo<T>)] pub struct Attachments<T: Send + Sync + 'static> { #[relationship] entities: Vec<Entity>, pub marker: PhantomData<T>, } ``` This now compiles! |
||
|
Tim Overbeek
|
ccb7069e7f
|
Change ChildOf to Childof { parent: Entity} and support deriving Relationship and RelationshipTarget with named structs (#17905)
# Objective fixes #17896 ## Solution Change ChildOf ( Entity ) to ChildOf { parent: Entity } by doing this we also allow users to use named structs for relationship derives, When you have more than 1 field in a struct with named fields the macro will look for a field with the attribute #[relationship] and all of the other fields should implement the Default trait. Unnamed fields are still supported. When u have a unnamed struct with more than one field the macro will fail. Do we want to support something like this ? ```rust #[derive(Component)] #[relationship_target(relationship = ChildOf)] pub struct Children (#[relationship] Entity, u8); ``` I could add this, it but doesn't seem nice. ## Testing crates/bevy_ecs - cargo test ## Showcase ```rust use bevy_ecs::component::Component; use bevy_ecs::entity::Entity; #[derive(Component)] #[relationship(relationship_target = Children)] pub struct ChildOf { #[relationship] pub parent: Entity, internal: u8, }; #[derive(Component)] #[relationship_target(relationship = ChildOf)] pub struct Children { children: Vec<Entity> }; ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Tim Overbeek <oorbecktim@Tims-MacBook-Pro.local> Co-authored-by: Tim Overbeek <oorbecktim@c-001-001-042.client.nl.eduvpn.org> Co-authored-by: Tim Overbeek <oorbecktim@c-001-001-059.client.nl.eduvpn.org> Co-authored-by: Tim Overbeek <oorbecktim@c-001-001-054.client.nl.eduvpn.org> Co-authored-by: Tim Overbeek <oorbecktim@c-001-001-027.client.nl.eduvpn.org> |
||
|
Zachary Harrold
|
5241e09671
|
Upgrade to Rust Edition 2024 (#17967)
# Objective - Fixes #17960 ## Solution - Followed the [edition upgrade guide](https://doc.rust-lang.org/edition-guide/editions/transitioning-an-existing-project-to-a-new-edition.html) ## Testing - CI --- ## Summary of Changes ### Documentation Indentation When using lists in documentation, proper indentation is now linted for. This means subsequent lines within the same list item must start at the same indentation level as the item. ```rust /* Valid */ /// - Item 1 /// Run-on sentence. /// - Item 2 struct Foo; /* Invalid */ /// - Item 1 /// Run-on sentence. /// - Item 2 struct Foo; ``` ### Implicit `!` to `()` Conversion `!` (the never return type, returned by `panic!`, etc.) no longer implicitly converts to `()`. This is particularly painful for systems with `todo!` or `panic!` statements, as they will no longer be functions returning `()` (or `Result<()>`), making them invalid systems for functions like `add_systems`. The ideal fix would be to accept functions returning `!` (or rather, _not_ returning), but this is blocked on the [stabilisation of the `!` type itself](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.never.html), which is not done. The "simple" fix would be to add an explicit `-> ()` to system signatures (e.g., `|| { todo!() }` becomes `|| -> () { todo!() }`). However, this is _also_ banned, as there is an existing lint which (IMO, incorrectly) marks this as an unnecessary annotation. So, the "fix" (read: workaround) is to put these kinds of `|| -> ! { ... }` closuers into variables and give the variable an explicit type (e.g., `fn()`). ```rust // Valid let system: fn() = || todo!("Not implemented yet!"); app.add_systems(..., system); // Invalid app.add_systems(..., || todo!("Not implemented yet!")); ``` ### Temporary Variable Lifetimes The order in which temporary variables are dropped has changed. The simple fix here is _usually_ to just assign temporaries to a named variable before use. ### `gen` is a keyword We can no longer use the name `gen` as it is reserved for a future generator syntax. This involved replacing uses of the name `gen` with `r#gen` (the raw-identifier syntax). ### Formatting has changed Use statements have had the order of imports changed, causing a substantial +/-3,000 diff when applied. For now, I have opted-out of this change by amending `rustfmt.toml` ```toml style_edition = "2021" ``` This preserves the original formatting for now, reducing the size of this PR. It would be a simple followup to update this to 2024 and run `cargo fmt`. ### New `use<>` Opt-Out Syntax Lifetimes are now implicitly included in RPIT types. There was a handful of instances where it needed to be added to satisfy the borrow checker, but there may be more cases where it _should_ be added to avoid breakages in user code. ### `MyUnitStruct { .. }` is an invalid pattern Previously, you could match against unit structs (and unit enum variants) with a `{ .. }` destructuring. This is no longer valid. ### Pretty much every use of `ref` and `mut` are gone Pattern binding has changed to the point where these terms are largely unused now. They still serve a purpose, but it is far more niche now. ### `iter::repeat(...).take(...)` is bad New lint recommends using the more explicit `iter::repeat_n(..., ...)` instead. ## Migration Guide The lifetimes of functions using return-position impl-trait (RPIT) are likely _more_ conservative than they had been previously. If you encounter lifetime issues with such a function, please create an issue to investigate the addition of `+ use<...>`. ## Notes - Check the individual commits for a clearer breakdown for what _actually_ changed. --------- Co-authored-by: François Mockers <francois.mockers@vleue.com> |
||
|
person93
|
575f66504b
|
Silence deprecation warning in Bundle derive macro (#17369) (#17790)
# Objective - Fixes #17369 ## Solution - Add `#[allow(deprecated)]` to the generated code. |
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
ea578415e1
|
Improved Spawn APIs and Bundle Effects (#17521)
## Objective
A major critique of Bevy at the moment is how boilerplatey it is to
compose (and read) entity hierarchies:
```rust
commands
.spawn(Foo)
.with_children(|p| {
p.spawn(Bar).with_children(|p| {
p.spawn(Baz);
});
p.spawn(Bar).with_children(|p| {
p.spawn(Baz);
});
});
```
There is also currently no good way to statically define and return an
entity hierarchy from a function. Instead, people often do this
"internally" with a Commands function that returns nothing, making it
impossible to spawn the hierarchy in other cases (direct World spawns,
ChildSpawner, etc).
Additionally, because this style of API results in creating the
hierarchy bits _after_ the initial spawn of a bundle, it causes ECS
archetype changes (and often expensive table moves).
Because children are initialized after the fact, we also can't count
them to pre-allocate space. This means each time a child inserts itself,
it has a high chance of overflowing the currently allocated capacity in
the `RelationshipTarget` collection, causing literal worst-case
reallocations.
We can do better!
## Solution
The Bundle trait has been extended to support an optional
`BundleEffect`. This is applied directly to World immediately _after_
the Bundle has fully inserted. Note that this is
[intentionally](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/16920)
_not done via a deferred Command_, which would require repeatedly
copying each remaining subtree of the hierarchy to a new command as we
walk down the tree (_not_ good performance).
This allows us to implement the new `SpawnRelated` trait for all
`RelationshipTarget` impls, which looks like this in practice:
```rust
world.spawn((
Foo,
Children::spawn((
Spawn((
Bar,
Children::spawn(Spawn(Baz)),
)),
Spawn((
Bar,
Children::spawn(Spawn(Baz)),
)),
))
))
```
`Children::spawn` returns `SpawnRelatedBundle<Children, L:
SpawnableList>`, which is a `Bundle` that inserts `Children`
(preallocated to the size of the `SpawnableList::size_hint()`).
`Spawn<B: Bundle>(pub B)` implements `SpawnableList` with a size of 1.
`SpawnableList` is also implemented for tuples of `SpawnableList` (same
general pattern as the Bundle impl).
There are currently three built-in `SpawnableList` implementations:
```rust
world.spawn((
Foo,
Children::spawn((
Spawn(Name::new("Child1")),
SpawnIter(["Child2", "Child3"].into_iter().map(Name::new),
SpawnWith(|parent: &mut ChildSpawner| {
parent.spawn(Name::new("Child4"));
parent.spawn(Name::new("Child5"));
})
)),
))
```
We get the benefits of "structured init", but we have nice flexibility
where it is required!
Some readers' first instinct might be to try to remove the need for the
`Spawn` wrapper. This is impossible in the Rust type system, as a tuple
of "child Bundles to be spawned" and a "tuple of Components to be added
via a single Bundle" is ambiguous in the Rust type system. There are two
ways to resolve that ambiguity:
1. By adding support for variadics to the Rust type system (removing the
need for nested bundles). This is out of scope for this PR :)
2. Using wrapper types to resolve the ambiguity (this is what I did in
this PR).
For the single-entity spawn cases, `Children::spawn_one` does also
exist, which removes the need for the wrapper:
```rust
world.spawn((
Foo,
Children::spawn_one(Bar),
))
```
## This works for all Relationships
This API isn't just for `Children` / `ChildOf` relationships. It works
for any relationship type, and they can be mixed and matched!
```rust
world.spawn((
Foo,
Observers::spawn((
Spawn(Observer::new(|trigger: Trigger<FuseLit>| {})),
Spawn(Observer::new(|trigger: Trigger<Exploded>| {})),
)),
OwnerOf::spawn(Spawn(Bar))
Children::spawn(Spawn(Baz))
))
```
## Macros
While `Spawn` is necessary to satisfy the type system, we _can_ remove
the need to express it via macros. The example above can be expressed
more succinctly using the new `children![X]` macro, which internally
produces `Children::spawn(Spawn(X))`:
```rust
world.spawn((
Foo,
children![
(
Bar,
children![Baz],
),
(
Bar,
children![Baz],
),
]
))
```
There is also a `related!` macro, which is a generic version of the
`children!` macro that supports any relationship type:
```rust
world.spawn((
Foo,
related!(Children[
(
Bar,
related!(Children[Baz]),
),
(
Bar,
related!(Children[Baz]),
),
])
))
```
## Returning Hierarchies from Functions
Thanks to these changes, the following pattern is now possible:
```rust
fn button(text: &str, color: Color) -> impl Bundle {
(
Node {
width: Val::Px(300.),
height: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
},
BackgroundColor(color),
children![
Text::new(text),
]
)
}
fn ui() -> impl Bundle {
(
Node {
width: Val::Percent(100.0),
height: Val::Percent(100.0),
..default(),
},
children![
button("hello", BLUE),
button("world", RED),
]
)
}
// spawn from a system
fn system(mut commands: Commands) {
commands.spawn(ui());
}
// spawn directly on World
world.spawn(ui());
```
## Additional Changes and Notes
* `Bundle::from_components` has been split out into
`BundleFromComponents::from_components`, enabling us to implement
`Bundle` for types that cannot be "taken" from the ECS (such as the new
`SpawnRelatedBundle`).
* The `NoBundleEffect` trait (which implements `BundleEffect`) is
implemented for empty tuples (and tuples of empty tuples), which allows
us to constrain APIs to only accept bundles that do not have effects.
This is critical because the current batch spawn APIs cannot efficiently
apply BundleEffects in their current form (as doing so in-place could
invalidate the cached raw pointers). We could consider allocating a
buffer of the effects to be applied later, but that does have
performance implications that could offset the balance and value of the
batched APIs (and would likely require some refactors to the underlying
code). I've decided to be conservative here. We can consider relaxing
that requirement on those APIs later, but that should be done in a
followup imo.
* I've ported a few examples to illustrate real-world usage. I think in
a followup we should port all examples to the `children!` form whenever
possible (and for cases that require things like SpawnIter, use the raw
APIs).
* Some may ask "why not use the `Relationship` to spawn (ex:
`ChildOf::spawn(Foo)`) instead of the `RelationshipTarget` (ex:
`Children::spawn(Spawn(Foo))`)?". That _would_ allow us to remove the
`Spawn` wrapper. I've explicitly chosen to disallow this pattern.
`Bundle::Effect` has the ability to create _significant_ weirdness.
Things in `Bundle` position look like components. For example
`world.spawn((Foo, ChildOf::spawn(Bar)))` _looks and reads_ like Foo is
a child of Bar. `ChildOf` is in Foo's "component position" but it is not
a component on Foo. This is a huge problem. Now that `Bundle::Effect`
exists, we should be _very_ principled about keeping the "weird and
unintuitive behavior" to a minimum. Things that read like components
_should be the components they appear to be".
## Remaining Work
* The macros are currently trivially implemented using macro_rules and
are currently limited to the max tuple length. They will require a
proc_macro implementation to work around the tuple length limit.
## Next Steps
* Port the remaining examples to use `children!` where possible and raw
`Spawn` / `SpawnIter` / `SpawnWith` where the flexibility of the raw API
is required.
## Migration Guide
Existing spawn patterns will continue to work as expected.
Manual Bundle implementations now require a `BundleEffect` associated
type. Exisiting bundles would have no bundle effect, so use `()`.
Additionally `Bundle::from_components` has been moved to the new
`BundleFromComponents` trait.
```rust
// Before
unsafe impl Bundle for X {
unsafe fn from_components<T, F>(ctx: &mut T, func: &mut F) -> Self {
}
/* remaining bundle impl here */
}
// After
unsafe impl Bundle for X {
type Effect = ();
/* remaining bundle impl here */
}
unsafe impl BundleFromComponents for X {
unsafe fn from_components<T, F>(ctx: &mut T, func: &mut F) -> Self {
}
}
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Gino Valente <49806985+MrGVSV@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Emerson Coskey <emerson@coskey.dev>
|
||
|
François Mockers
|
7400e7adfd
|
Cleanup publish process (#17728)
# Objective - publish script copy the license files to all subcrates, meaning that all publish are dirty. this breaks git verification of crates - the order and list of crates to publish is manually maintained, leading to error. cargo 1.84 is more strict and the list is currently wrong ## Solution - duplicate all the licenses to all crates and remove the `--allow-dirty` flag - instead of a manual list of crates, get it from `cargo package --workspace` - remove the `--no-verify` flag to... verify more things? |
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
3c8fae2390
|
Improved Entity Mapping and Cloning (#17687)
Fixes #17535 Bevy's approach to handling "entity mapping" during spawning and cloning needs some work. The addition of [Relations](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/17398) both [introduced a new "duplicate entities" bug when spawning scenes in the scene system](#17535) and made the weaknesses of the current mapping system exceedingly clear: 1. Entity mapping requires _a ton_ of boilerplate (implement or derive VisitEntities and VisitEntitesMut, then register / reflect MapEntities). Knowing the incantation is challenging and if you forget to do it in part or in whole, spawning subtly breaks. 2. Entity mapping a spawned component in scenes incurs unnecessary overhead: look up ReflectMapEntities, create a _brand new temporary instance_ of the component using FromReflect, map the entities in that instance, and then apply that on top of the actual component using reflection. We can do much better. Additionally, while our new [Entity cloning system](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/16132) is already pretty great, it has some areas we can make better: * It doesn't expose semantic info about the clone (ex: ignore or "clone empty"), meaning we can't key off of that in places where it would be useful, such as scene spawning. Rather than duplicating this info across contexts, I think it makes more sense to add that info to the clone system, especially given that we'd like to use cloning code in some of our spawning scenarios. * EntityCloner is currently built in a way that prioritizes a single entity clone * EntityCloner's recursive cloning is built to be done "inside out" in a parallel context (queue commands that each have a clone of EntityCloner). By making EntityCloner the orchestrator of the clone we can remove internal arcs, improve the clarity of the code, make EntityCloner mutable again, and simplify the builder code. * EntityCloner does not currently take into account entity mapping. This is necessary to do true "bullet proof" cloning, would allow us to unify the per-component scene spawning and cloning UX, and ultimately would allow us to use EntityCloner in place of raw reflection for scenes like `Scene(World)` (which would give us a nice performance boost: fewer archetype moves, less reflection overhead). ## Solution ### Improved Entity Mapping First, components now have first-class "entity visiting and mapping" behavior: ```rust #[derive(Component, Reflect)] #[reflect(Component)] struct Inventory { size: usize, #[entities] items: Vec<Entity>, } ``` Any field with the `#[entities]` annotation will be viewable and mappable when cloning and spawning scenes. Compare that to what was required before! ```rust #[derive(Component, Reflect, VisitEntities, VisitEntitiesMut)] #[reflect(Component, MapEntities)] struct Inventory { #[visit_entities(ignore)] size: usize, items: Vec<Entity>, } ``` Additionally, for relationships `#[entities]` is implied, meaning this "just works" in scenes and cloning: ```rust #[derive(Component, Reflect)] #[relationship(relationship_target = Children)] #[reflect(Component)] struct ChildOf(pub Entity); ``` Note that Component _does not_ implement `VisitEntities` directly. Instead, it has `Component::visit_entities` and `Component::visit_entities_mut` methods. This is for a few reasons: 1. We cannot implement `VisitEntities for C: Component` because that would conflict with our impl of VisitEntities for anything that implements `IntoIterator<Item=Entity>`. Preserving that impl is more important from a UX perspective. 2. We should not implement `Component: VisitEntities` VisitEntities in the Component derive, as that would increase the burden of manual Component trait implementors. 3. Making VisitEntitiesMut directly callable for components would make it easy to invalidate invariants defined by a component author. By putting it in the `Component` impl, we can make it harder to call naturally / unavailable to autocomplete using `fn visit_entities_mut(this: &mut Self, ...)`. `ReflectComponent::apply_or_insert` is now `ReflectComponent::apply_or_insert_mapped`. By moving mapping inside this impl, we remove the need to go through the reflection system to do entity mapping, meaning we no longer need to create a clone of the target component, map the entities in that component, and patch those values on top. This will make spawning mapped entities _much_ faster (The default `Component::visit_entities_mut` impl is an inlined empty function, so it will incur no overhead for unmapped entities). ### The Bug Fix To solve #17535, spawning code now skips entities with the new `ComponentCloneBehavior::Ignore` and `ComponentCloneBehavior::RelationshipTarget` variants (note RelationshipTarget is a temporary "workaround" variant that allows scenes to skip these components. This is a temporary workaround that can be removed as these cases should _really_ be using EntityCloner logic, which should be done in a followup PR. When that is done, `ComponentCloneBehavior::RelationshipTarget` can be merged into the normal `ComponentCloneBehavior::Custom`). ### Improved Cloning * `Option<ComponentCloneHandler>` has been replaced by `ComponentCloneBehavior`, which encodes additional intent and context (ex: `Default`, `Ignore`, `Custom`, `RelationshipTarget` (this last one is temporary)). * Global per-world entity cloning configuration has been removed. This felt overly complicated, increased our API surface, and felt too generic. Each clone context can have different requirements (ex: what a user wants in a specific system, what a scene spawner wants, etc). I'd prefer to see how far context-specific EntityCloners get us first. * EntityCloner's internals have been reworked to remove Arcs and make it mutable. * EntityCloner is now directly stored on EntityClonerBuilder, simplifying the code somewhat * EntityCloner's "bundle scratch" pattern has been moved into the new BundleScratch type, improving its usability and making it usable in other contexts (such as future cross-world cloning code). Currently this is still private, but with some higher level safe APIs it could be used externally for making dynamic bundles * EntityCloner's recursive cloning behavior has been "externalized". It is now responsible for orchestrating recursive clones, meaning it no longer needs to be sharable/clone-able across threads / read-only. * EntityCloner now does entity mapping during clones, like scenes do. This gives behavior parity and also makes it more generically useful. * `RelatonshipTarget::RECURSIVE_SPAWN` is now `RelationshipTarget::LINKED_SPAWN`, and this field is used when cloning relationship targets to determine if cloning should happen recursively. The new `LINKED_SPAWN` term was picked to make it more generically applicable across spawning and cloning scenarios. ## Next Steps * I think we should adapt EntityCloner to support cross world cloning. I think this PR helps set the stage for that by making the internals slightly more generalized. We could have a CrossWorldEntityCloner that reuses a lot of this infrastructure. * Once we support cross world cloning, we should use EntityCloner to spawn `Scene(World)` scenes. This would yield significant performance benefits (no archetype moves, less reflection overhead). --------- Co-authored-by: eugineerd <70062110+eugineerd@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> |
||
|
ElliottjPierce
|
1b2cf7d6cd
|
Isolate component registration (#17671)
# Objective Progresses #17569. The end goal here is to synchronize component registration. See the other PR for details for the motivation behind that. For this PR specifically, the objective is to decouple `Components` from `Storages`. What components are registered etc should have nothing to do with what Storages looks like. Storages should only care about what entity archetypes have been spawned. ## Solution Previously, this was used to create sparse sets for relevant components when those components were registered. Now, we do that when the component is inserted/spawned. This PR proposes doing that in `BundleInfo::new`, but there may be a better place. ## Testing In theory, this shouldn't have changed any functionality, so no new tests were created. I'm not aware of any examples that make heavy use of sparse set components either. ## Migration Guide - Remove storages from functions where it is no longer needed. - Note that SparseSets are no longer present for all registered sparse set components, only those that have been spawned. --------- Co-authored-by: SpecificProtagonist <vincentjunge@posteo.net> Co-authored-by: Chris Russell <8494645+chescock@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Zachary Harrold
|
d0c0bad7b4
|
Split Component::register_component_hooks into individual methods (#17685)
# Objective - Fixes #17411 ## Solution - Deprecated `Component::register_component_hooks` - Added individual methods for each hook which return `None` if the hook is unused. ## Testing - CI --- ## Migration Guide `Component::register_component_hooks` is now deprecated and will be removed in a future release. When implementing `Component` manually, also implement the respective hook methods on `Component`. ```rust // Before impl Component for Foo { // snip fn register_component_hooks(hooks: &mut ComponentHooks) { hooks.on_add(foo_on_add); } } // After impl Component for Foo { // snip fn on_add() -> Option<ComponentHook> { Some(foo_on_add) } } ``` ## Notes I've chosen to deprecate `Component::register_component_hooks` rather than outright remove it to ease the migration guide. While it is in a state of deprecation, it must be used by `Components::register_component_internal` to ensure users who haven't migrated to the new hook definition scheme aren't left behind. For users of the new scheme, a default implementation of `Component::register_component_hooks` is provided which forwards the new individual hook implementations. Personally, I think this is a cleaner API to work with, and would allow the documentation for hooks to exist on the respective `Component` methods (e.g., documentation for `OnAdd` can exist on `Component::on_add`). Ideally, `Component::on_add` would be the hook itself rather than a getter for the hook, but it is the only way to early-out for a no-op hook, which is important for performance. ## Migration Guide `Component::register_component_hooks` has been deprecated. If you are manually implementing the `Component` trait and registering hooks there, use the individual methods such as `on_add` instead for increased clarity. |
||
|
couyit
|
03af547c28
|
Move Item and fetch to QueryData from WorldQuery (#17679)
# Objective Fixes #17662 ## Solution Moved `Item` and `fetch` from `WorldQuery` to `QueryData`, and adjusted their implementations accordingly. Currently, documentation related to `fetch` is written under `WorldQuery`. It would be more appropriate to move it to the `QueryData` documentation for clarity. I am not very experienced with making contributions. If there are any mistakes or areas for improvement, I would appreciate any suggestions you may have. ## Migration Guide The `WorldQuery::Item` type and `WorldQuery::fetch` method have been moved to `QueryData`, as they were not useful for `QueryFilter` types. --------- Co-authored-by: Chris Russell <8494645+chescock@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Tim Overbeek
|
eb04f8a476
|
Simplify derive_from_world (#17534)
# Objective simplify existing implementation --------- Co-authored-by: Gino Valente <49806985+MrGVSV@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Tim Overbeek
|
da57dfb62f
|
DeriveWorld for enums (#17496)
# Objective Fixes #17457 ## Solution #[derive(FromWorld)] now works with enums by specifying which variant should be used. ## Showcase ```rust #[Derive(FromWorld)] enum Game { #[from_world] Playing, Stopped } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Benjamin Brienen <benjamin.brienen@outlook.com> |
||
|
Alice Cecile
|
44ad3bf62b
|
Move Resource trait to its own file (#17469)
# Objective `bevy_ecs`'s `system` module is something of a grab bag, and *very* large. This is particularly true for the `system_param` module, which is more than 2k lines long! While it could be defensible to put `Res` and `ResMut` there (lol no they're in change_detection.rs, obviously), it doesn't make any sense to put the `Resource` trait there. This is confusing to navigate (and painful to work on and review). ## Solution - Create a root level `bevy_ecs/resource.rs` module to mirror `bevy_ecs/component.rs` - move the `Resource` trait to that module - move the `Resource` derive macro to that module as well (Rust really likes when you pun on the names of the derive macro and trait and put them in the same path) - fix all of the imports ## Notes to reviewers - We could probably move more stuff into here, but I wanted to keep this PR as small as possible given the absurd level of import changes. - This PR is ground work for my upcoming attempts to store resource data on components (resources-as-entities). Splitting this code out will make the work and review a bit easier, and is the sort of overdue refactor that's good to do as part of more meaningful work. ## Testing cargo build works! ## Migration Guide `bevy_ecs::system::Resource` has been moved to `bevy_ecs::resource::Resource`. |
||
|
Emerson Coskey
|
a99674ab86
|
FromWorld derive macro (#17352)
simple derive macro for `FromWorld`. Going to be needed for composable pipeline specializers but probably a nice thing to have regardless ## Testing simple manual testing, nothing seemed to blow up. I'm no proc macro pro though, so there's a chance I've mishandled spans somewhere or something. |
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
21f1e3045c
|
Relationships (non-fragmenting, one-to-many) (#17398)
This adds support for one-to-many non-fragmenting relationships (with planned paths for fragmenting and non-fragmenting many-to-many relationships). "Non-fragmenting" means that entities with the same relationship type, but different relationship targets, are not forced into separate tables (which would cause "table fragmentation"). Functionally, this fills a similar niche as the current Parent/Children system. The biggest differences are: 1. Relationships have simpler internals and significantly improved performance and UX. Commands and specialized APIs are no longer necessary to keep everything in sync. Just spawn entities with the relationship components you want and everything "just works". 2. Relationships are generalized. Bevy can provide additional built in relationships, and users can define their own. **REQUEST TO REVIEWERS**: _please don't leave top level comments and instead comment on specific lines of code. That way we can take advantage of threaded discussions. Also dont leave comments simply pointing out CI failures as I can read those just fine._ ## Built on top of what we have Relationships are implemented on top of the Bevy ECS features we already have: components, immutability, and hooks. This makes them immediately compatible with all of our existing (and future) APIs for querying, spawning, removing, scenes, reflection, etc. The fewer specialized APIs we need to build, maintain, and teach, the better. ## Why focus on one-to-many non-fragmenting first? 1. This allows us to improve Parent/Children relationships immediately, in a way that is reasonably uncontroversial. Switching our hierarchy to fragmenting relationships would have significant performance implications. ~~Flecs is heavily considering a switch to non-fragmenting relations after careful considerations of the performance tradeoffs.~~ _(Correction from @SanderMertens: Flecs is implementing non-fragmenting storage specialized for asset hierarchies, where asset hierarchies are many instances of small trees that have a well defined structure)_ 2. Adding generalized one-to-many relationships is currently a priority for the [Next Generation Scene / UI effort](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/14437). Specifically, we're interested in building reactions and observers on top. ## The changes This PR does the following: 1. Adds a generic one-to-many Relationship system 3. Ports the existing Parent/Children system to Relationships, which now lives in `bevy_ecs::hierarchy`. The old `bevy_hierarchy` crate has been removed. 4. Adds on_despawn component hooks 5. Relationships can opt-in to "despawn descendants" behavior, meaning that the entire relationship hierarchy is despawned when `entity.despawn()` is called. The built in Parent/Children hierarchies enable this behavior, and `entity.despawn_recursive()` has been removed. 6. `world.spawn` now applies commands after spawning. This ensures that relationship bookkeeping happens immediately and removes the need to manually flush. This is in line with the equivalent behaviors recently added to the other APIs (ex: insert). 7. Removes the ValidParentCheckPlugin (system-driven / poll based) in favor of a `validate_parent_has_component` hook. ## Using Relationships The `Relationship` trait looks like this: ```rust pub trait Relationship: Component + Sized { type RelationshipSources: RelationshipSources<Relationship = Self>; fn get(&self) -> Entity; fn from(entity: Entity) -> Self; } ``` A relationship is a component that: 1. Is a simple wrapper over a "target" Entity. 2. Has a corresponding `RelationshipSources` component, which is a simple wrapper over a collection of entities. Every "target entity" targeted by a "source entity" with a `Relationship` has a `RelationshipSources` component, which contains every "source entity" that targets it. For example, the `Parent` component (as it currently exists in Bevy) is the `Relationship` component and the entity containing the Parent is the "source entity". The entity _inside_ the `Parent(Entity)` component is the "target entity". And that target entity has a `Children` component (which implements `RelationshipSources`). In practice, the Parent/Children relationship looks like this: ```rust #[derive(Relationship)] #[relationship(relationship_sources = Children)] pub struct Parent(pub Entity); #[derive(RelationshipSources)] #[relationship_sources(relationship = Parent)] pub struct Children(Vec<Entity>); ``` The Relationship and RelationshipSources derives automatically implement Component with the relevant configuration (namely, the hooks necessary to keep everything in sync). The most direct way to add relationships is to spawn entities with relationship components: ```rust let a = world.spawn_empty().id(); let b = world.spawn(Parent(a)).id(); assert_eq!(world.entity(a).get::<Children>().unwrap(), &[b]); ``` There are also convenience APIs for spawning more than one entity with the same relationship: ```rust world.spawn_empty().with_related::<Children>(|s| { s.spawn_empty(); s.spawn_empty(); }) ``` The existing `with_children` API is now a simpler wrapper over `with_related`. This makes this change largely non-breaking for existing spawn patterns. ```rust world.spawn_empty().with_children(|s| { s.spawn_empty(); s.spawn_empty(); }) ``` There are also other relationship APIs, such as `add_related` and `despawn_related`. ## Automatic recursive despawn via the new on_despawn hook `RelationshipSources` can opt-in to "despawn descendants" behavior, which will despawn all related entities in the relationship hierarchy: ```rust #[derive(RelationshipSources)] #[relationship_sources(relationship = Parent, despawn_descendants)] pub struct Children(Vec<Entity>); ``` This means that `entity.despawn_recursive()` is no longer required. Instead, just use `entity.despawn()` and the relevant related entities will also be despawned. To despawn an entity _without_ despawning its parent/child descendants, you should remove the `Children` component first, which will also remove the related `Parent` components: ```rust entity .remove::<Children>() .despawn() ``` This builds on the on_despawn hook introduced in this PR, which is fired when an entity is despawned (before other hooks). ## Relationships are the source of truth `Relationship` is the _single_ source of truth component. `RelationshipSources` is merely a reflection of what all the `Relationship` components say. By embracing this, we are able to significantly improve the performance of the system as a whole. We can rely on component lifecycles to protect us against duplicates, rather than needing to scan at runtime to ensure entities don't already exist (which results in quadratic runtime). A single source of truth gives us constant-time inserts. This does mean that we cannot directly spawn populated `Children` components (or directly add or remove entities from those components). I personally think this is a worthwhile tradeoff, both because it makes the performance much better _and_ because it means theres exactly one way to do things (which is a philosophy we try to employ for Bevy APIs). As an aside: treating both sides of the relationship as "equivalent source of truth relations" does enable building simple and flexible many-to-many relationships. But this introduces an _inherent_ need to scan (or hash) to protect against duplicates. [`evergreen_relations`](https://github.com/EvergreenNest/evergreen_relations) has a very nice implementation of the "symmetrical many-to-many" approach. Unfortunately I think the performance issues inherent to that approach make it a poor choice for Bevy's default relationship system. ## Followup Work * Discuss renaming `Parent` to `ChildOf`. I refrained from doing that in this PR to keep the diff reasonable, but I'm personally biased toward this change (and using that naming pattern generally for relationships). * [Improved spawning ergonomics](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/16920) * Consider adding relationship observers/triggers for "relationship targets" whenever a source is added or removed. This would replace the current "hierarchy events" system, which is unused upstream but may have existing users downstream. I think triggers are the better fit for this than a buffered event queue, and would prefer not to add that back. * Fragmenting relations: My current idea hinges on the introduction of "value components" (aka: components whose type _and_ value determines their ComponentId, via something like Hashing / PartialEq). By labeling a Relationship component such as `ChildOf(Entity)` as a "value component", `ChildOf(e1)` and `ChildOf(e2)` would be considered "different components". This makes the transition between fragmenting and non-fragmenting a single flag, and everything else continues to work as expected. * Many-to-many support * Non-fragmenting: We can expand Relationship to be a list of entities instead of a single entity. I have largely already written the code for this. * Fragmenting: With the "value component" impl mentioned above, we get many-to-many support "for free", as it would allow inserting multiple copies of a Relationship component with different target entities. Fixes #3742 (If this PR is merged, I think we should open more targeted followup issues for the work above, with a fresh tracking issue free of the large amount of less-directed historical context) Fixes #17301 Fixes #12235 Fixes #15299 Fixes #15308 ## Migration Guide * Replace `ChildBuilder` with `ChildSpawnerCommands`. * Replace calls to `.set_parent(parent_id)` with `.insert(Parent(parent_id))`. * Replace calls to `.replace_children()` with `.remove::<Children>()` followed by `.add_children()`. Note that you'll need to manually despawn any children that are not carried over. * Replace calls to `.despawn_recursive()` with `.despawn()`. * Replace calls to `.despawn_descendants()` with `.despawn_related::<Children>()`. * If you have any calls to `.despawn()` which depend on the children being preserved, you'll need to remove the `Children` component first. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> |
||
|
Alice Cecile
|
237c6b207e
|
Remove Event: Component trait bound using a wrapper type which impls Component (#17380)
# Objective As raised in https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/17317, the `Event: Component` trait bound is confusing to users. In general, a type `E` (like `AppExit`) which implements `Event` should not: - be stored as a component on an entity - be a valid option for `Query<&AppExit>` - require the storage type and other component metadata to be specified Events are not components (even if they one day use some of the same internal mechanisms), and this trait bound is confusing to users. We're also automatically generating `Component` impls with our derive macro, which should be avoided when possible to improve explicitness and avoid conflicts with user impls. Closes #17317, closes #17333 ## Solution - We only care that each unique event type gets a unique `ComponentId` - dynamic events need their own tools for getting identifiers anyways - This avoids complicating the internals of `ComponentId` generation. - Clearly document why this cludge-y solution exists. In the medium term, I think that either a) properly generalizing `ComponentId` (and moving it into `bevy_reflect?) or b) using a new-typed `Entity` as the key for events is more correct. This change is stupid simple though, and removes the offending trait bound in a way that doesn't introduce complex tech debt and does not risk changes to the internals. This change does not: - restrict our ability to implement dynamic buffered events (the main improvement over #17317) - there's still a fair bit of work to do, but this is a step in the right direction - limit our ability to store event metadata on entities in the future - make it harder for users to work with types that are both events and components (just add the derive / trait bound) ## Migration Guide The `Event` trait no longer requires the `Component` trait. If you were relying on this behavior, change your trait bounds from `Event` to `Event + Component`. If you also want your `Event` type to implement `Component`, add a derive. --------- Co-authored-by: Chris Russell <8494645+chescock@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
MichiRecRoom
|
3742e621ef
|
Allow clippy::too_many_arguments to lint without warnings (#17249)
# Objective Many instances of `clippy::too_many_arguments` linting happen to be on systems - functions which we don't call manually, and thus there's not much reason to worry about the argument count. ## Solution Allow `clippy::too_many_arguments` globally, and remove all lint attributes related to it. |
||
|
github-actions[bot]
|
573b980685
|
Bump Version after Release (#17176)
Bump version after release This PR has been auto-generated --------- Co-authored-by: Bevy Auto Releaser <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: François Mockers <mockersf@gmail.com> |
||
|
Benjamin Brienen
|
1675d68366
|
Fix beta CI (#16984)
# Objective Fixes #16607 ## Solution Satisfy clippy ## Testing Ran clippy |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
3ef99cf82c
|
Replace impl_param_set proc macro with a macro_rules macro (#16847)
# Objective Simplify the code by using `macro_rules` instead of a proc macro where possible. ## Solution Replace `impl_param_set` proc macro with a `macro_rules` macro. |
||
|
Zachary Harrold
|
1f2d0e6308
|
Add no_std support to bevy_ecs (#16758)
# Objective - Contributes to #15460 ## Solution - Added the following features: - `std` (default) - `async_executor` (default) - `edge_executor` - `critical-section` - `portable-atomic` - Gated `tracing` in `bevy_utils` to allow compilation on certain platforms - Switched from `tracing` to `log` for simple message logging within `bevy_ecs`. Note that `tracing` supports capturing from `log` so this should be an uncontroversial change. - Fixed imports and added feature gates as required - Made `bevy_tasks` optional within `bevy_ecs`. Turns out it's only needed for parallel operations which are already gated behind `multi_threaded` anyway. ## Testing - Added to `compile-check-no-std` CI command - `cargo check -p bevy_ecs --no-default-features --features edge_executor,critical-section,portable-atomic --target thumbv6m-none-eabi` - `cargo check -p bevy_ecs --no-default-features --features edge_executor,critical-section` - `cargo check -p bevy_ecs --no-default-features` ## Draft Release Notes Bevy's core ECS now supports `no_std` platforms. In prior versions of Bevy, it was not possible to work with embedded or niche platforms due to our reliance on the standard library, `std`. This has blocked a number of novel use-cases for Bevy, such as an embedded database for IoT devices, or for creating games on retro consoles. With this release, `bevy_ecs` no longer requires `std`. To use Bevy on a `no_std` platform, you must disable default features and enable the new `edge_executor` and `critical-section` features. You may also need to enable `portable-atomic` and `critical-section` if your platform does not natively support all atomic types and operations used by Bevy. ```toml [dependencies] bevy_ecs = { version = "0.16", default-features = false, features = [ # Required for platforms with incomplete atomics (e.g., Raspberry Pi Pico) "portable-atomic", "critical-section", # Optional "bevy_reflect", "serialize", "bevy_debug_stepping", "edge_executor" ] } ``` Currently, this has been tested on bare-metal x86 and the Raspberry Pi Pico. If you have trouble using `bevy_ecs` on a particular platform, please reach out either through a GitHub issue or in the `no_std` working group on the Bevy Discord server. Keep an eye out for future `no_std` updates as we continue to improve the parity between `std` and `no_std`. We look forward to seeing what kinds of applications are now possible with Bevy! ## Notes - Creating PR in draft to ensure CI is passing before requesting reviews. - This implementation has no support for multithreading in `no_std`, especially due to `NonSend` being unsound if allowed in multithreading. The reason is we cannot check the `ThreadId` in `no_std`, so we have no mechanism to at-runtime determine if access is sound. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Vic <59878206+Victoronz@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Rich Churcher
|
f2719f5470
|
Rust 1.83, allow -> expect (missing_docs) (#16561)
# Objective We were waiting for 1.83 to address most of these, due to a bug with `missing_docs` and `expect`. Relates to, but does not entirely complete, #15059. ## Solution - Upgrade to 1.83 - Switch `allow(missing_docs)` to `expect(missing_docs)` - Remove a few now-unused `allow`s along the way, or convert to `expect` |
||
|
raldone01
|
760d0a3100
|
Use one BevyManifest instance in proc macros (#16766)
# Objective - Minor consistency improvement in proc macro code. - Remove `get_path_direct` since it was only used once anyways and doesn't add much. ## Solution - Possibly a minor performance improvement since the `Cargo.toml` wont be parsed as often. ## Testing - I don't think it breaks anything. - This is my first time working on bevy itself. Is there a script to do a quick verify of my pr? ## Other PR Similar to #7536 but has no extra dependencies. Co-authored-by: François Mockers <mockersf@gmail.com> |
||
|
SpecificProtagonist
|
5f1e114209
|
Descriptive error message for circular required components recursion (#16648)
# Objective Fixes #16645 ## Solution Keep track of components in callstack when registering required components. ## Testing Added a test checking that the error fires. --- ## Showcase ```rust #[derive(Component, Default)] #[require(B)] struct A; #[derive(Component, Default)] #[require(A)] struct B; World::new().spawn(A); ``` ``` thread 'main' panicked at /home/vj/workspace/rust/bevy/crates/bevy_ecs/src/component.rs:415:13: Recursive required components detected: A → B → A ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Chris Russell <8494645+chescock@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Joona Aalto
|
99b6f1d330
|
Link to required components docs in component type docs (#16687)
# Objective #16575 moved required component docs from the `Component` impl to type docs. However, it doesn't actually link to what [required components](https://docs.rs/bevy/0.15.0/bevy/ecs/component/trait.Component.html#required-components) are and how they work. ## Solution Link to [required components](https://docs.rs/bevy/0.15.0/bevy/ecs/component/trait.Component.html#required-components)! ## Testing I tested the link for some components in different Bevy crates. I did not test in external third party crates, but I would assume that it should work there too. --- ## Showcase  Note: The tooltip doesn't show the `#required-components` anchor for some reason, but it is there. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: SpecificProtagonist <vincentjunge@posteo.net> |
||
|
Zachary Harrold
|
a35811d088
|
Add Immutable Component Support (#16372)
# Objective - Fixes #16208 ## Solution - Added an associated type to `Component`, `Mutability`, which flags whether a component is mutable, or immutable. If `Mutability= Mutable`, the component is mutable. If `Mutability= Immutable`, the component is immutable. - Updated `derive_component` to default to mutable unless an `#[component(immutable)]` attribute is added. - Updated `ReflectComponent` to check if a component is mutable and, if not, panic when attempting to mutate. ## Testing - CI - `immutable_components` example. --- ## Showcase Users can now mark a component as `#[component(immutable)]` to prevent safe mutation of a component while it is attached to an entity: ```rust #[derive(Component)] #[component(immutable)] struct Foo { // ... } ``` This prevents creating an exclusive reference to the component while it is attached to an entity. This is particularly powerful when combined with component hooks, as you can now fully track a component's value, ensuring whatever invariants you desire are upheld. Before this would be done my making a component private, and manually creating a `QueryData` implementation which only permitted read access. <details> <summary>Using immutable components as an index</summary> ```rust /// This is an example of a component like [`Name`](bevy::prelude::Name), but immutable. #[derive(Clone, Copy, PartialEq, Eq, PartialOrd, Ord, Hash, Component)] #[component( immutable, on_insert = on_insert_name, on_replace = on_replace_name, )] pub struct Name(pub &'static str); /// This index allows for O(1) lookups of an [`Entity`] by its [`Name`]. #[derive(Resource, Default)] struct NameIndex { name_to_entity: HashMap<Name, Entity>, } impl NameIndex { fn get_entity(&self, name: &'static str) -> Option<Entity> { self.name_to_entity.get(&Name(name)).copied() } } fn on_insert_name(mut world: DeferredWorld<'_>, entity: Entity, _component: ComponentId) { let Some(&name) = world.entity(entity).get::<Name>() else { unreachable!() }; let Some(mut index) = world.get_resource_mut::<NameIndex>() else { return; }; index.name_to_entity.insert(name, entity); } fn on_replace_name(mut world: DeferredWorld<'_>, entity: Entity, _component: ComponentId) { let Some(&name) = world.entity(entity).get::<Name>() else { unreachable!() }; let Some(mut index) = world.get_resource_mut::<NameIndex>() else { return; }; index.name_to_entity.remove(&name); } // Setup our name index world.init_resource::<NameIndex>(); // Spawn some entities! let alyssa = world.spawn(Name("Alyssa")).id(); let javier = world.spawn(Name("Javier")).id(); // Check our index let index = world.resource::<NameIndex>(); assert_eq!(index.get_entity("Alyssa"), Some(alyssa)); assert_eq!(index.get_entity("Javier"), Some(javier)); // Changing the name of an entity is also fully capture by our index world.entity_mut(javier).insert(Name("Steven")); // Javier changed their name to Steven let steven = javier; // Check our index let index = world.resource::<NameIndex>(); assert_eq!(index.get_entity("Javier"), None); assert_eq!(index.get_entity("Steven"), Some(steven)); ``` </details> Additionally, users can use `Component<Mutability = ...>` in trait bounds to enforce that a component _is_ mutable or _is_ immutable. When using `Component` as a trait bound without specifying `Mutability`, any component is applicable. However, methods which only work on mutable or immutable components are unavailable, since the compiler must be pessimistic about the type. ## Migration Guide - When implementing `Component` manually, you must now provide a type for `Mutability`. The type `Mutable` provides equivalent behaviour to earlier versions of `Component`: ```rust impl Component for Foo { type Mutability = Mutable; // ... } ``` - When working with generic components, you may need to specify that your generic parameter implements `Component<Mutability = Mutable>` rather than `Component` if you require mutable access to said component. - The entity entry API has had to have some changes made to minimise friction when working with immutable components. Methods which previously returned a `Mut<T>` will now typically return an `OccupiedEntry<T>` instead, requiring you to add an `into_mut()` to get the `Mut<T>` item again. ## Draft Release Notes Components can now be made immutable while stored within the ECS. Components are the fundamental unit of data within an ECS, and Bevy provides a number of ways to work with them that align with Rust's rules around ownership and borrowing. One part of this is hooks, which allow for defining custom behavior at key points in a component's lifecycle, such as addition and removal. However, there is currently no way to respond to _mutation_ of a component using hooks. The reasons for this are quite technical, but to summarize, their addition poses a significant challenge to Bevy's core promises around performance. Without mutation hooks, it's relatively trivial to modify a component in such a way that breaks invariants it intends to uphold. For example, you can use `core::mem::swap` to swap the components of two entities, bypassing the insertion and removal hooks. This means the only way to react to this modification is via change detection in a system, which then begs the question of what happens _between_ that alteration and the next run of that system? Alternatively, you could make your component private to prevent mutation, but now you need to provide commands and a custom `QueryData` implementation to allow users to interact with your component at all. Immutable components solve this problem by preventing the creation of an exclusive reference to the component entirely. Without an exclusive reference, the only way to modify an immutable component is via removal or replacement, which is fully captured by component hooks. To make a component immutable, simply add `#[component(immutable)]`: ```rust #[derive(Component)] #[component(immutable)] struct Foo { // ... } ``` When implementing `Component` manually, there is an associated type `Mutability` which controls this behavior: ```rust impl Component for Foo { type Mutability = Mutable; // ... } ``` Note that this means when working with generic components, you may need to specify that a component is mutable to gain access to certain methods: ```rust // Before fn bar<C: Component>() { // ... } // After fn bar<C: Component<Mutability = Mutable>>() { // ... } ``` With this new tool, creating index components, or caching data on an entity should be more user friendly, allowing libraries to provide APIs relying on components and hooks to uphold their invariants. ## Notes - ~~I've done my best to implement this feature, but I'm not happy with how reflection has turned out. If any reflection SMEs know a way to improve this situation I'd greatly appreciate it.~~ There is an outstanding issue around the fallibility of mutable methods on `ReflectComponent`, but the DX is largely unchanged from `main` now. - I've attempted to prevent all safe mutable access to a component that does not implement `Component<Mutability = Mutable>`, but there may still be some methods I have missed. Please indicate so and I will address them, as they are bugs. - Unsafe is an escape hatch I am _not_ attempting to prevent. Whatever you do with unsafe is between you and your compiler. - I am marking this PR as ready, but I suspect it will undergo fairly major revisions based on SME feedback. - I've marked this PR as _Uncontroversial_ based on the feature, not the implementation. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Benjamin Brienen <benjamin.brienen@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Gino Valente <49806985+MrGVSV@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Nuutti Kotivuori <naked@iki.fi> |
||
|
SpecificProtagonist
|
d92fc1e456
|
Move required components doc to type doc (#16575)
# Objective Make documentation of a component's required components more visible by moving it to the type's docs ## Solution Change `#[require]` from a derive macro helper to an attribute macro. Disadvantages: - this silences any unused code warnings on the component, as it is used by the macro! - need to import `require` if not using the ecs prelude (I have not included this in the migration guilde as Rust tooling already suggests the fix) --- ## Showcase  --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: JMS55 <47158642+JMS55@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
eugineerd
|
2e267bba5a
|
Entity cloning (#16132)
## Objective Fixes #1515 This PR implements a flexible entity cloning system. The primary use case for it is to clone dynamically-generated entities. Example: ```rs #[derive(Component, Clone)] pub struct Projectile; #[derive(Component, Clone)] pub struct Damage { value: f32, } fn player_input( mut commands: Commands, projectiles: Query<Entity, With<Projectile>>, input: Res<ButtonInput<KeyCode>>, ) { // Fire a projectile if input.just_pressed(KeyCode::KeyF) { commands.spawn((Projectile, Damage { value: 10.0 })); } // Triplicate all active projectiles if input.just_pressed(KeyCode::KeyT) { for projectile in projectiles.iter() { // To triplicate a projectile we need to create 2 more clones for _ in 0..2{ commands.clone_entity(projectile) } } } } ``` ## Solution ### Commands Add a `clone_entity` command to create a clone of an entity with all components that can be cloned. Components that can't be cloned will be ignored. ```rs commands.clone_entity(entity) ``` If there is a need to configure the cloning process (like set to clone recursively), there is a second command: ```rs commands.clone_entity_with(entity, |builder| { builder.recursive(true) }); ``` Both of these commands return `EntityCommands` of the cloned entity, so the copy can be modified afterwards. ### Builder All these commands use `EntityCloneBuilder` internally. If there is a need to clone an entity using `World` instead, it is also possible: ```rs let entity = world.spawn(Component).id(); let entity_clone = world.spawn_empty().id(); EntityCloneBuilder::new(&mut world).clone_entity(entity, entity_clone); ``` Builder has methods to `allow` or `deny` certain components during cloning if required and can be extended by implementing traits on it. This PR includes two `EntityCloneBuilder` extensions: `CloneEntityWithObserversExt` to configure adding cloned entity to observers of the original entity, and `CloneEntityRecursiveExt` to configure cloning an entity recursively. ### Clone implementations By default, all components that implement either `Clone` or `Reflect` will be cloned (with `Clone`-based implementation preferred in case component implements both). This can be overriden on a per-component basis: ```rs impl Component for SomeComponent { const STORAGE_TYPE: StorageType = StorageType::Table; fn get_component_clone_handler() -> ComponentCloneHandler { // Don't clone this component ComponentCloneHandler::Ignore } } ``` ### `ComponentCloneHandlers` Clone implementation specified in `get_component_clone_handler` will get registered in `ComponentCloneHandlers` (stored in `bevy_ecs::component::Components`) at component registration time. The clone handler implementation provided by a component can be overriden after registration like so: ```rs let component_id = world.components().component_id::<Component>().unwrap() world.get_component_clone_handlers_mut() .set_component_handler(component_id, ComponentCloneHandler::Custom(component_clone_custom)) ``` The default clone handler for all components that do not explicitly define one (or don't derive `Component`) is `component_clone_via_reflect` if `bevy_reflect` feature is enabled, and `component_clone_ignore` (noop) otherwise. Default handler can be overriden using `ComponentCloneHandlers::set_default_handler` ### Handlers Component clone handlers can be used to modify component cloning behavior. The general signature for a handler that can be used in `ComponentCloneHandler::Custom` is as follows: ```rs pub fn component_clone_custom( world: &mut DeferredWorld, entity_cloner: &EntityCloner, ) { // implementation } ``` The `EntityCloner` implementation (used internally by `EntityCloneBuilder`) assumes that after calling this custom handler, the `target` entity has the desired version of the component from the `source` entity. ### Builder handler overrides Besides component-defined and world-overriden handlers, `EntityCloneBuilder` also has a way to override handlers locally. It is mainly used to allow configuration methods like `recursive` and `add_observers`. ```rs // From observer clone handler implementation impl CloneEntityWithObserversExt for EntityCloneBuilder<'_> { fn add_observers(&mut self, add_observers: bool) -> &mut Self { if add_observers { self.override_component_clone_handler::<ObservedBy>(ComponentCloneHandler::Custom( component_clone_observed_by, )) } else { self.remove_component_clone_handler_override::<ObservedBy>() } } } ``` ## Testing Includes some basic functionality tests and doctests. Performance-wise this feature is the same as calling `clone` followed by `insert` for every entity component. There is also some inherent overhead due to every component clone handler having to access component data through `World`, but this can be reduced without breaking current public API in a later PR. |