04c2b32be8
243 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Testare
|
da83232fa8
|
Let Component::map_entities defer to MapEntities (#19414)
# Objective
The objective of this PR is to enable Components to use their
`MapEntities` implementation for `Component::map_entities`.
With the improvements to the entity mapping system, there is definitely
a huge reduction in boilerplate. However, especially since
`(Entity)HashMap<..>` doesn't implement `MapEntities` (I presume because
the lack of specialization in rust makes `HashMap<Entity|X, Entity|X>`
complicated), when somebody has types that contain these hashmaps they
can't use this approach.
More so, we can't even depend on the previous implementation, since
`Component::map_entities` is used instead of
`MapEntities::map_entities`. Outside of implementing `Component `and
`Component::map_entities` on these types directly, the only path forward
is to create a custom type to wrap the hashmaps and implement map
entities on that, or split these components into a wrapper type that
implement `Component`, and an inner type that implements `MapEntities`.
## Current Solution
The solution was to allow adding `#[component(map_entities)]` on the
component. By default this will defer to the `MapEntities`
implementation.
```rust
#[derive(Component)]
#[component(map_entities)]
struct Inventory {
items: HashMap<Entity, usize>
}
impl MapEntities for Inventory {
fn map_entities<M: EntityMapper>(&mut self, entity_mapper: &mut M) {
self.items = self.items
.drain()
.map(|(id, count)|(entity_mapper.get_mapped(id), count))
.collect();
}
}
```
You can use `#[component(map_entities = <function path>)]` instead to
substitute other code in for components. This function can also include
generics, but sso far I haven't been able to find a case where they are
needed.
```rust
#[derive(Component)]
#[component(map_entities = map_the_map)]
// Also works #[component(map_entities = map_the_map::<T,_>)]
struct Inventory<T> {
items: HashMap<Entity, T>
}
fn map_the_map<T, M: EntityMapper>(inv: &mut Inventory<T>, entity_mapper: &mut M) {
inv.items = inv.items
.drain()
.map(|(id, count)|(entity_mapper.get_mapped(id), count))
.collect();
}
```
The idea is that with the previous changes to MapEntities, MapEntities
is implemented more for entity collections than for Components. If you
have a component that makes sense as both, `#[component(map_entities)]`
would work great, while otherwise a component can use
`#[component(map_entities = <function>)]` to change the behavior of
`Component::map_entities` without opening up the component type to be
included in other components.
## (Original Solution if you want to follow the PR)
The solution was to allow adding `#[component(entities)]` on the
component itself to defer to the `MapEntities` implementation
```rust
#[derive(Component)]
#[component(entities)]
struct Inventory {
items: HashMap<Entity, usize>
}
impl MapEntities for Inventory {
fn map_entities<M: EntityMapper>(&mut self, entity_mapper: &mut M) {
self.items = self.items
.drain()
.map(|(id, count)|(entity_mapper.get_mapped(id), count))
.collect();
}
}
```
## Testing
I tested this by patching my local changes into my own bevy project. I
had a system that loads a scene file and executes some logic with a
Component that contains a `HashMap<Entity, UVec2>`, and it panics when
Entity is not found from another query. Since the 0.16 update this
system has reliably panicked upon attempting to the load the scene.
After patching my code in, I added `#[component(entities)]` to this
component, and I was able to successfully load the scene.
Additionally, I wrote a doc test.
## Call-outs
### Relationships
This overrules the default mapping of relationship fields. Anything else
seemed more problematic, as you'd have inconsistent behavior between
`MapEntities` and `Component`.
|
||
|
github-actions[bot]
|
a466084167
|
Bump Version after Release (#19774)
Bump version after release This PR has been auto-generated Fixes #19766 --------- Co-authored-by: Bevy Auto Releaser <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: François Mockers <francois.mockers@vleue.com> Co-authored-by: François Mockers <mockersf@gmail.com> |
||
|
urben1680
|
c6ae964709
|
EntityWorldMut methods do not automatically overwrite Relationship components (#19601)
# Objective Some methods and commands carelessly overwrite `Relationship` components. This may overwrite additional data stored at them which is undesired. Part of #19589 ## Solution A new private method will be used instead of insert: `modify_or_insert_relation_with_relationship_hook_mode`. This method behaves different to `insert` if `Relationship` is a larger type than `Entity` and already contains this component. It will then use the `modify_component` API and a new `Relationship::set_risky` method to set the related entity, keeping all other data untouched. For the `replace_related`(`_with_difference`) methods this also required a `InsertHookMode` parameter for efficient modifications of multiple children. The changes here are limited to the non-public methods. I would appreciate feedback if this is all good. # Testing Added tests of all methods that previously could reset `Relationship` data. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> |
||
|
Giacomo Stevanato
|
35166d9029
|
Refactor bundle derive (#19749)
# Objective - Splitted off from #19491 - Make adding generated code to the `Bundle` derive macro easier - Fix a bug when multiple fields are `#[bundle(ignore)]` ## Solution - Instead of accumulating the code for each method in a different `Vec`, accumulate only the names of non-ignored fields and their types, then use `quote` to generate the code for each of them in the method body. - To fix the bug, change the code populating the `BundleFieldKind` to push only one of them per-field (previously each `#[bundle(ignore)]` resulted in pushing twice, once for the correct `BundleFieldKind::Ignore` and then again unconditionally for `BundleFieldKind::Component`) ## Testing - Added a regression test for the bug that was fixed |
||
|
Emerson Coskey
|
8e1d0051d2
|
Fix QueryData derive codegen (#19750)
Custom derived `QueryData` impls currently generate `Item` structs with the lifetimes swapped, which blows up the borrow checker sometimes. See: https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/749335865876021248/1385509416086011914 could add a regression test, TBH I don't know the error well enough to do that minimally. Seems like it's that both lifetimes on `QueryData::Item` need to be covariant, but I'm not sure. |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
d0550f58ae
|
Remove 's lifetime from WorldQuery::Fetch (#19720)
# Objective Unblock #18162. #15396 added the `'s` lifetime to `QueryData::Item` to make it possible for query items to borrow from the state. The state isn't passed directly to `QueryData::fetch()`, so it also added the `'s` lifetime to `WorldQuery::Fetch` so that we can pass the borrows through there. Unfortunately, having `WorldQuery::Fetch` borrow from the state makes it impossible to have owned state, because we store the state and the `Fetch` in the same `struct` during iteration. ## Solution Undo the change to add the `'s` lifetime to `WorldQuery::Fetch`. Instead, add a `&'s Self::State` parameter to `QueryData::fetch()` and `QueryFilter::filter_fetch()` so that borrows from the state can be passed directly to query items. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Emerson Coskey <emerson@coskey.dev> |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
f7e112a3c9
|
Let query items borrow from query state to avoid needing to clone (#15396)
# Objective Improve the performance of `FilteredEntity(Ref|Mut)` and `Entity(Ref|Mut)Except`. `FilteredEntityRef` needs an `Access<ComponentId>` to determine what components it can access. There is one stored in the query state, but query items cannot borrow from the state, so it has to `clone()` the access for each row. Cloning the access involves memory allocations and can be expensive. ## Solution Let query items borrow from their query state. Add an `'s` lifetime to `WorldQuery::Item` and `WorldQuery::Fetch`, similar to the one in `SystemParam`, and provide `&'s Self::State` to the fetch so that it can borrow from the state. Unfortunately, there are a few cases where we currently return query items from temporary query states: the sorted iteration methods create a temporary state to query the sort keys, and the `EntityRef::components<Q>()` methods create a temporary state for their query. To allow these to continue to work with most `QueryData` implementations, introduce a new subtrait `ReleaseStateQueryData` that converts a `QueryItem<'w, 's>` to `QueryItem<'w, 'static>`, and is implemented for everything except `FilteredEntity(Ref|Mut)` and `Entity(Ref|Mut)Except`. `#[derive(QueryData)]` will generate `ReleaseStateQueryData` implementations that apply when all of the subqueries implement `ReleaseStateQueryData`. This PR does not actually change the implementation of `FilteredEntity(Ref|Mut)` or `Entity(Ref|Mut)Except`! That will be done as a follow-up PR so that the changes are easier to review. I have pushed the changes as chescock/bevy#5. ## Testing I ran performance traces of many_foxes, both against main and against chescock/bevy#5, both including #15282. These changes do appear to make generalized animation a bit faster: (Red is main, yellow is chescock/bevy#5)  ## Migration Guide The `WorldQuery::Item` and `WorldQuery::Fetch` associated types and the `QueryItem` and `ROQueryItem` type aliases now have an additional lifetime parameter corresponding to the `'s` lifetime in `Query`. Manual implementations of `WorldQuery` will need to update the method signatures to include the new lifetimes. Other uses of the types will need to be updated to include a lifetime parameter, although it can usually be passed as `'_`. In particular, `ROQueryItem` is used when implementing `RenderCommand`. Before: ```rust fn render<'w>( item: &P, view: ROQueryItem<'w, Self::ViewQuery>, entity: Option<ROQueryItem<'w, Self::ItemQuery>>, param: SystemParamItem<'w, '_, Self::Param>, pass: &mut TrackedRenderPass<'w>, ) -> RenderCommandResult; ``` After: ```rust fn render<'w>( item: &P, view: ROQueryItem<'w, '_, Self::ViewQuery>, entity: Option<ROQueryItem<'w, '_, Self::ItemQuery>>, param: SystemParamItem<'w, '_, Self::Param>, pass: &mut TrackedRenderPass<'w>, ) -> RenderCommandResult; ``` --- Methods on `QueryState` that take `&mut self` may now result in conflicting borrows if the query items capture the lifetime of the mutable reference. This affects `get()`, `iter()`, and others. To fix the errors, first call `QueryState::update_archetypes()`, and then replace a call `state.foo(world, param)` with `state.query_manual(world).foo_inner(param)`. Alternately, you may be able to restructure the code to call `state.query(world)` once and then make multiple calls using the `Query`. Before: ```rust let mut state: QueryState<_, _> = ...; let d1 = state.get(world, e1); let d2 = state.get(world, e2); // Error: cannot borrow `state` as mutable more than once at a time println!("{d1:?}"); println!("{d2:?}"); ``` After: ```rust let mut state: QueryState<_, _> = ...; state.update_archetypes(world); let d1 = state.get_manual(world, e1); let d2 = state.get_manual(world, e2); // OR state.update_archetypes(world); let d1 = state.query(world).get_inner(e1); let d2 = state.query(world).get_inner(e2); // OR let query = state.query(world); let d1 = query.get_inner(e1); let d1 = query.get_inner(e2); println!("{d1:?}"); println!("{d2:?}"); ``` |
||
|
Joona Aalto
|
38c3423693
|
Event Split: Event, EntityEvent, and BufferedEvent (#19647)
# Objective Closes #19564. The current `Event` trait looks like this: ```rust pub trait Event: Send + Sync + 'static { type Traversal: Traversal<Self>; const AUTO_PROPAGATE: bool = false; fn register_component_id(world: &mut World) -> ComponentId { ... } fn component_id(world: &World) -> Option<ComponentId> { ... } } ``` The `Event` trait is used by both buffered events (`EventReader`/`EventWriter`) and observer events. If they are observer events, they can optionally be targeted at specific `Entity`s or `ComponentId`s, and can even be propagated to other entities. However, there has long been a desire to split the trait semantically for a variety of reasons, see #14843, #14272, and #16031 for discussion. Some reasons include: - It's very uncommon to use a single event type as both a buffered event and targeted observer event. They are used differently and tend to have distinct semantics. - A common footgun is using buffered events with observers or event readers with observer events, as there is no type-level error that prevents this kind of misuse. - #19440 made `Trigger::target` return an `Option<Entity>`. This *seriously* hurts ergonomics for the general case of entity observers, as you need to `.unwrap()` each time. If we could statically determine whether the event is expected to have an entity target, this would be unnecessary. There's really two main ways that we can categorize events: push vs. pull (i.e. "observer event" vs. "buffered event") and global vs. targeted: | | Push | Pull | | ------------ | --------------- | --------------------------- | | **Global** | Global observer | `EventReader`/`EventWriter` | | **Targeted** | Entity observer | - | There are many ways to approach this, each with their tradeoffs. Ultimately, we kind of want to split events both ways: - A type-level distinction between observer events and buffered events, to prevent people from using the wrong kind of event in APIs - A statically designated entity target for observer events to avoid accidentally using untargeted events for targeted APIs This PR achieves these goals by splitting event traits into `Event`, `EntityEvent`, and `BufferedEvent`, with `Event` being the shared trait implemented by all events. ## `Event`, `EntityEvent`, and `BufferedEvent` `Event` is now a very simple trait shared by all events. ```rust pub trait Event: Send + Sync + 'static { // Required for observer APIs fn register_component_id(world: &mut World) -> ComponentId { ... } fn component_id(world: &World) -> Option<ComponentId> { ... } } ``` You can call `trigger` for *any* event, and use a global observer for listening to the event. ```rust #[derive(Event)] struct Speak { message: String, } // ... app.add_observer(|trigger: On<Speak>| { println!("{}", trigger.message); }); // ... commands.trigger(Speak { message: "Y'all like these reworked events?".to_string(), }); ``` To allow an event to be targeted at entities and even propagated further, you can additionally implement the `EntityEvent` trait: ```rust pub trait EntityEvent: Event { type Traversal: Traversal<Self>; const AUTO_PROPAGATE: bool = false; } ``` This lets you call `trigger_targets`, and to use targeted observer APIs like `EntityCommands::observe`: ```rust #[derive(Event, EntityEvent)] #[entity_event(traversal = &'static ChildOf, auto_propagate)] struct Damage { amount: f32, } // ... let enemy = commands.spawn((Enemy, Health(100.0))).id(); // Spawn some armor as a child of the enemy entity. // When the armor takes damage, it will bubble the event up to the enemy. let armor_piece = commands .spawn((ArmorPiece, Health(25.0), ChildOf(enemy))) .observe(|trigger: On<Damage>, mut query: Query<&mut Health>| { // Note: `On::target` only exists because this is an `EntityEvent`. let mut health = query.get(trigger.target()).unwrap(); health.0 -= trigger.amount(); }); commands.trigger_targets(Damage { amount: 10.0 }, armor_piece); ``` > [!NOTE] > You *can* still also trigger an `EntityEvent` without targets using `trigger`. We probably *could* make this an either-or thing, but I'm not sure that's actually desirable. To allow an event to be used with the buffered API, you can implement `BufferedEvent`: ```rust pub trait BufferedEvent: Event {} ``` The event can then be used with `EventReader`/`EventWriter`: ```rust #[derive(Event, BufferedEvent)] struct Message(String); fn write_hello(mut writer: EventWriter<Message>) { writer.write(Message("I hope these examples are alright".to_string())); } fn read_messages(mut reader: EventReader<Message>) { // Process all buffered events of type `Message`. for Message(message) in reader.read() { println!("{message}"); } } ``` In summary: - Need a basic event you can trigger and observe? Derive `Event`! - Need the event to be targeted at an entity? Derive `EntityEvent`! - Need the event to be buffered and support the `EventReader`/`EventWriter` API? Derive `BufferedEvent`! ## Alternatives I'll now cover some of the alternative approaches I have considered and briefly explored. I made this section collapsible since it ended up being quite long :P <details> <summary>Expand this to see alternatives</summary> ### 1. Unified `Event` Trait One option is not to have *three* separate traits (`Event`, `EntityEvent`, `BufferedEvent`), and to instead just use associated constants on `Event` to determine whether an event supports targeting and buffering or not: ```rust pub trait Event: Send + Sync + 'static { type Traversal: Traversal<Self>; const AUTO_PROPAGATE: bool = false; const TARGETED: bool = false; const BUFFERED: bool = false; fn register_component_id(world: &mut World) -> ComponentId { ... } fn component_id(world: &World) -> Option<ComponentId> { ... } } ``` Methods can then use bounds like `where E: Event<TARGETED = true>` or `where E: Event<BUFFERED = true>` to limit APIs to specific kinds of events. This would keep everything under one `Event` trait, but I don't think it's necessarily a good idea. It makes APIs harder to read, and docs can't easily refer to specific types of events. You can also create weird invariants: what if you specify `TARGETED = false`, but have `Traversal` and/or `AUTO_PROPAGATE` enabled? ### 2. `Event` and `Trigger` Another option is to only split the traits between buffered events and observer events, since that is the main thing people have been asking for, and they have the largest API difference. If we did this, I think we would need to make the terms *clearly* separate. We can't really use `Event` and `BufferedEvent` as the names, since it would be strange that `BufferedEvent` doesn't implement `Event`. Something like `ObserverEvent` and `BufferedEvent` could work, but it'd be more verbose. For this approach, I would instead keep `Event` for the current `EventReader`/`EventWriter` API, and call the observer event a `Trigger`, since the "trigger" terminology is already used in the observer context within Bevy (both as a noun and a verb). This is also what a long [bikeshed on Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/749335865876021248/1298057661878898791) seemed to land on at the end of last year. ```rust // For `EventReader`/`EventWriter` pub trait Event: Send + Sync + 'static {} // For observers pub trait Trigger: Send + Sync + 'static { type Traversal: Traversal<Self>; const AUTO_PROPAGATE: bool = false; const TARGETED: bool = false; fn register_component_id(world: &mut World) -> ComponentId { ... } fn component_id(world: &World) -> Option<ComponentId> { ... } } ``` The problem is that "event" is just a really good term for something that "happens". Observers are rapidly becoming the more prominent API, so it'd be weird to give them the `Trigger` name and leave the good `Event` name for the less common API. So, even though a split like this seems neat on the surface, I think it ultimately wouldn't really work. We want to keep the `Event` name for observer events, and there is no good alternative for the buffered variant. (`Message` was suggested, but saying stuff like "sends a collision message" is weird.) ### 3. `GlobalEvent` + `TargetedEvent` What if instead of focusing on the buffered vs. observed split, we *only* make a distinction between global and targeted events? ```rust // A shared event trait to allow global observers to work pub trait Event: Send + Sync + 'static { fn register_component_id(world: &mut World) -> ComponentId { ... } fn component_id(world: &World) -> Option<ComponentId> { ... } } // For buffered events and non-targeted observer events pub trait GlobalEvent: Event {} // For targeted observer events pub trait TargetedEvent: Event { type Traversal: Traversal<Self>; const AUTO_PROPAGATE: bool = false; } ``` This is actually the first approach I implemented, and it has the neat characteristic that you can only use non-targeted APIs like `trigger` with a `GlobalEvent` and targeted APIs like `trigger_targets` with a `TargetedEvent`. You have full control over whether the entity should or should not have a target, as they are fully distinct at the type-level. However, there's a few problems: - There is no type-level indication of whether a `GlobalEvent` supports buffered events or just non-targeted observer events - An `Event` on its own does literally nothing, it's just a shared trait required to make global observers accept both non-targeted and targeted events - If an event is both a `GlobalEvent` and `TargetedEvent`, global observers again have ambiguity on whether an event has a target or not, undermining some of the benefits - The names are not ideal ### 4. `Event` and `EntityEvent` We can fix some of the problems of Alternative 3 by accepting that targeted events can also be used in non-targeted contexts, and simply having the `Event` and `EntityEvent` traits: ```rust // For buffered events and non-targeted observer events pub trait Event: Send + Sync + 'static { fn register_component_id(world: &mut World) -> ComponentId { ... } fn component_id(world: &World) -> Option<ComponentId> { ... } } // For targeted observer events pub trait EntityEvent: Event { type Traversal: Traversal<Self>; const AUTO_PROPAGATE: bool = false; } ``` This is essentially identical to this PR, just without a dedicated `BufferedEvent`. The remaining major "problem" is that there is still zero type-level indication of whether an `Event` event *actually* supports the buffered API. This leads us to the solution proposed in this PR, using `Event`, `EntityEvent`, and `BufferedEvent`. </details> ## Conclusion The `Event` + `EntityEvent` + `BufferedEvent` split proposed in this PR aims to solve all the common problems with Bevy's current event model while keeping the "weirdness" factor minimal. It splits in terms of both the push vs. pull *and* global vs. targeted aspects, while maintaining a shared concept for an "event". ### Why I Like This - The term "event" remains as a single concept for all the different kinds of events in Bevy. - Despite all event types being "events", they use fundamentally different APIs. Instead of assuming that you can use an event type with any pattern (when only one is typically supported), you explicitly opt in to each one with dedicated traits. - Using separate traits for each type of event helps with documentation and clearer function signatures. - I can safely make assumptions on expected usage. - If I see that an event is an `EntityEvent`, I can assume that I can use `observe` on it and get targeted events. - If I see that an event is a `BufferedEvent`, I can assume that I can use `EventReader` to read events. - If I see both `EntityEvent` and `BufferedEvent`, I can assume that both APIs are supported. In summary: This allows for a unified concept for events, while limiting the different ways to use them with opt-in traits. No more guess-work involved when using APIs. ### Problems? - Because `BufferedEvent` implements `Event` (for more consistent semantics etc.), you can still use all buffered events for non-targeted observers. I think this is fine/good. The important part is that if you see that an event implements `BufferedEvent`, you know that the `EventReader`/`EventWriter` API should be supported. Whether it *also* supports other APIs is secondary. - I currently only support `trigger_targets` for an `EntityEvent`. However, you can technically target components too, without targeting any entities. I consider that such a niche and advanced use case that it's not a huge problem to only support it for `EntityEvent`s, but we could also split `trigger_targets` into `trigger_entities` and `trigger_components` if we wanted to (or implement components as entities :P). - You can still trigger an `EntityEvent` *without* targets. I consider this correct, since `Event` implements the non-targeted behavior, and it'd be weird if implementing another trait *removed* behavior. However, it does mean that global observers for entity events can technically return `Entity::PLACEHOLDER` again (since I got rid of the `Option<Entity>` added in #19440 for ergonomics). I think that's enough of an edge case that it's not a huge problem, but it is worth keeping in mind. - ~~Deriving both `EntityEvent` and `BufferedEvent` for the same type currently duplicates the `Event` implementation, so you instead need to manually implement one of them.~~ Changed to always requiring `Event` to be derived. ## Related Work There are plans to implement multi-event support for observers, especially for UI contexts. [Cart's example](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/14649#issuecomment-2960402508) API looked like this: ```rust // Truncated for brevity trigger: Trigger<( OnAdd<Pressed>, OnRemove<Pressed>, OnAdd<InteractionDisabled>, OnRemove<InteractionDisabled>, OnInsert<Hovered>, )>, ``` I believe this shouldn't be in conflict with this PR. If anything, this PR might *help* achieve the multi-event pattern for entity observers with fewer footguns: by statically enforcing that all of these events are `EntityEvent`s in the context of `EntityCommands::observe`, we can avoid misuse or weird cases where *some* events inside the trigger are targeted while others are not. |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
bb4ea9c28b
|
Stop storing access for all systems (#19477)
# Objective Reduce memory usage by storing fewer copies of `FilteredAccessSet<ComponentId>`. Currently, the `System` trait exposes the `component_access_set` for the system, which is used by the multi-threaded executor to determine which systems can run concurrently. But because it is available on the trait, it needs to be stored for *every* system, even ones that are not run by the executor! In particular, it is never needed for observers, or for the inner systems in a `PipeSystem` or `CombinatorSystem`. ## Solution Instead of exposing the access from a method on `System`, return it from `System::initialize`. Since it is still needed during scheduling, store the access alongside the boxed system in the schedule. That's not quite enough for systems built using `SystemParamBuilder`s, though. Those calculate the access in `SystemParamBuilder::build`, which happens earlier than `System::initialize`. To handle those, we separate `SystemParam::init_state` into `init_state`, which creates the state value, and `init_access`, which calculates the access. This lets `System::initialize` call `init_access` on a state that was provided by the builder. An additional benefit of that separation is that it removes the need to duplicate access checks between `SystemParamBuilder::build` and `SystemParam::init_state`. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> |
||
|
Alice Cecile
|
6ddd0f16a8
|
Component lifecycle reorganization and documentation (#19543)
# Objective I set out with one simple goal: clearly document the differences between each of the component lifecycle events via module docs. Unfortunately, no such module existed: the various lifecycle code was scattered to the wind. Without a unified module, it's very hard to discover the related types, and there's nowhere good to put my shiny new documentation. ## Solution 1. Unify the assorted types into a single `bevy_ecs::component_lifecycle` module. 2. Write docs. 3. Write a migration guide. ## Testing Thanks CI! ## Follow-up 1. The lifecycle event names are pretty confusing, especially `OnReplace`. We should consider renaming those. No bikeshedding in my PR though! 2. Observers need real module docs too :( 3. Any additional functional changes should be done elsewhere; this is a simple docs and re-org PR. --------- Co-authored-by: theotherphil <phil.j.ellison@gmail.com> |
||
|
Marcel Müller
|
2768af5d2d
|
Allow not emitting BundleFromComponents with Bundle derive macro (#19249)
# Objective Fixes #19136 ## Solution - Add a new container attribute which when set does not emit `BundleFromComponents` ## Testing - Did you test these changes? Yes, a new test was added. - Are there any parts that need more testing? Since `BundleFromComponents` is unsafe I made extra sure that I did not misunderstand its purpose. As far as I can tell, _not_ implementing it is ok. - How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything specific they need to know? Nope - If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are there any important ones you can't test? I don't think the platform is relevant --- One thing I am not sure about is how to document this? I'll gladly add it --------- Signed-off-by: Marcel Müller <neikos@neikos.email> |
||
|
theotherphil
|
6b5289bd5e
|
deny(missing_docs) for bevy_ecs_macros (#19523)
# Objective Deny missing docs for bevy_ecs_macros, towards https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/3492. ## Solution More docs of the form ``` /// Does the thing fn do_the_thing() {} ``` But I don't think the derive macros are where anyone is going to be looking for details of these concepts and deny(missing_docs) inevitably results in some items having noddy docs. |
||
|
SpecificProtagonist
|
a266e7e642
|
More uninlined_format_args fixes (#19396)
# Objective There are several uninlined format args (seems to be in more formatting macros and in more crates) that are not detected on stable, but are on nightly. ## Solution Fix them. |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
571b3ba475
|
Remove ArchetypeComponentId and archetype_component_access (#19143)
# Objective Remove `ArchetypeComponentId` and `archetype_component_access`. Following #16885, they are no longer used by the engine, so we can stop spending time calculating them or space storing them. ## Solution Remove `ArchetypeComponentId` and everything that touches it. The `System::update_archetype_component_access` method no longer needs to update `archetype_component_access`. We do still need to update query caches, but we no longer need to do so *before* running the system. We'd have to touch every caller anyway if we gave the method a better name, so just remove `System::update_archetype_component_access` and `SystemParam::new_archetype` entirely, and update the query cache in `Query::get_param`. The `Single` and `Populated` params also need their query caches updated in `SystemParam::validate_param`, so change `validate_param` to take `&mut Self::State` instead of `&Self::State`. |
||
|
Emerson Coskey
|
fb2d79ad60
|
Better macro errors for get_struct_fields (#17639)
# Objective - Currently, the error span for `get_struct_field` when encountering an enum or union points to the macro invocation, rather than the `enum` or `union` token. It also doesn't mention which macro reported the error. ## Solution - Report the correct error span - Add parameter for passing in the name of the macro invocation ## Testing Bevy compiles fine with this change ## Migration Guide ```rs // before let fields = get_struct_fields(&ast.data); // after let fields = get_struct_fields(&ast.data, "derive(Bundle)"); ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Chris Russell <8494645+chescock@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Tim
|
4924cf5828
|
Remove upcasting methods + Cleanup interned label code (#18984)
Hiya! # Objective - Remove upcasting methods that are no longer necessary since Rust 1.86. - Cleanup the interned label code. ## Notes - I didn't try to remove the upcasting methods from `bevy_reflect`, as there appears to be some complexity related to remote type reflection. - There are likely some other upcasting methods floating around. ## Testing I ran the `breakout` example to check that the hashing/eq implementations of the labels are still correct. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> |
||
|
mgi388
|
01d2b8571c
|
Remove dead states code from bevy_ecs (#19210)
`bevy_ecs` was meant to have the `States` and `SubStates` `proc_macro_derive`s removed when the separate `bevy_state` [was created](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/13216) but they were missed. |
||
|
Jordan Dominion
|
86cc02dca2
|
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" } ``` |
||
|
Tim Overbeek
|
60cdefd128
|
Derive clone_behavior for Components (#18811)
Allow Derive(Component) to specify a clone_behavior ```rust #[derive(Component)] #[component(clone_behavior = Ignore)] MyComponent; ``` |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
bea0a0a9bc
|
Let FilteredEntity(Ref|Mut) receive access when nested. (#18236)
# Objective Let `FilteredEntityRef` and `FilteredEntityMut` receive access when nested inside tuples or `#[derive(QueryData)]` types. Make sure to exclude any access that would conflict with other subqueries! Fixes #14349 ## Solution Replace `WorldQuery::set_access(state, access)` with a new method, `QueryData::provide_extra_access(state, access, available_access)`, that passes both the total available access and the currently used access. This is called after `WorldQuery::update_component_access()`, so any access used by ordinary subqueries will be known. `FilteredEntityRef` and `FilteredEntityMut` can use the combination to determine how much access they can safely take, while tuples can safely pass those parameters directly to their subqueries. This requires a new `Access::remove_conflicting_access()` method that can be used to remove any access that would conflict with existing access. Implementing this method was easier by first factoring some common set manipulation code out of `Access::extend`. I can extract that refactoring to a separate PR if desired. Have `FilteredEntity(Ref|Mut)` store `Access` instead of `FilteredAccess` because they do not need to keep track of the filter. This was necessary in an early draft but no longer is. I left it in because it's small and I'm touching that code anyway, but I can extract it to a separate PR if desired. |
||
|
Tim Overbeek
|
e02c3662fb
|
Code quality cleanup pass for #[require] (#18621)
#18555 improved syntax for required components. However some code was a bit redundant after the new parsing and struct initializing would not give proper errors. This PR fixes that. --------- Co-authored-by: Tim Overbeek <oorbecktim@Tims-MacBook-Pro.local> |
||
|
Chris Russell
|
9e240ee99a
|
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 ``` |
||
|
krunchington
|
83ffc90c6c
|
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
|
1ba9da0812
|
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). |
||
|
Carter Anderson
|
538afe2330
|
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
|
837991a5b5
|
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
|
6a981aaa6f
|
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
|
a033f1b206
|
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
|
55fd10502c
|
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>
|
||
|
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> |