# Objective
- This PR aims to make creating meshes a little bit more ergonomic,
specifically by removing the need for intermediate mutable variables.
## Solution
- We add methods that consume the `Mesh` and return a mesh with the
specified changes, so that meshes can be entirely constructed via
builder-style calls, without intermediate variables;
- Methods are flagged with `#[must_use]` to ensure proper use;
- Examples are updated to use the new methods where applicable. Some
examples are kept with the mutating methods so that users can still
easily discover them, and also where the new methods wouldn't really be
an improvement.
## Examples
Before:
```rust
let mut mesh = Mesh::new(PrimitiveTopology::TriangleList);
mesh.insert_attribute(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_POSITION, vs);
mesh.insert_attribute(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL, vns);
mesh.insert_attribute(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_UV_0, vts);
mesh.set_indices(Some(Indices::U32(tris)));
mesh
```
After:
```rust
Mesh::new(PrimitiveTopology::TriangleList)
.with_inserted_attribute(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_POSITION, vs)
.with_inserted_attribute(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL, vns)
.with_inserted_attribute(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_UV_0, vts)
.with_indices(Some(Indices::U32(tris)))
```
Before:
```rust
let mut cube = Mesh::from(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 });
cube.generate_tangents().unwrap();
PbrBundle {
mesh: meshes.add(cube),
..default()
}
```
After:
```rust
PbrBundle {
mesh: meshes.add(
Mesh::from(shape::Cube { size: 1.0 })
.with_generated_tangents()
.unwrap(),
),
..default()
}
```
---
## Changelog
- Added consuming builder methods for more ergonomic `Mesh` creation:
`with_inserted_attribute()`, `with_removed_attribute()`,
`with_indices()`, `with_duplicated_vertices()`,
`with_computed_flat_normals()`, `with_generated_tangents()`,
`with_morph_targets()`, `with_morph_target_names()`.
# Objective
Fix wonky torus normals.
## Solution
I attempted this previously in #3549, but it looks like I botched it. It seems like I mixed up the y/z axes. Somehow, the result looked okay from that particular camera angle.
This video shows toruses generated with
- [left, orange] original torus mesh code
- [middle, pink] PR 3549
- [right, purple] This PR
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/200550/164093183-58a7647c-b436-4512-99cd-cf3b705cefb0.mov
This PR makes a number of changes to how meshes and vertex attributes are handled, which the goal of enabling easy and flexible custom vertex attributes:
* Reworks the `Mesh` type to use the newly added `VertexAttribute` internally
* `VertexAttribute` defines the name, a unique `VertexAttributeId`, and a `VertexFormat`
* `VertexAttributeId` is used to produce consistent sort orders for vertex buffer generation, replacing the more expensive and often surprising "name based sorting"
* Meshes can be used to generate a `MeshVertexBufferLayout`, which defines the layout of the gpu buffer produced by the mesh. `MeshVertexBufferLayouts` can then be used to generate actual `VertexBufferLayouts` according to the requirements of a specific pipeline. This decoupling of "mesh layout" vs "pipeline vertex buffer layout" is what enables custom attributes. We don't need to standardize _mesh layouts_ or contort meshes to meet the needs of a specific pipeline. As long as the mesh has what the pipeline needs, it will work transparently.
* Mesh-based pipelines now specialize on `&MeshVertexBufferLayout` via the new `SpecializedMeshPipeline` trait (which behaves like `SpecializedPipeline`, but adds `&MeshVertexBufferLayout`). The integrity of the pipeline cache is maintained because the `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is treated as part of the key (which is fully abstracted from implementers of the trait ... no need to add any additional info to the specialization key).
* Hashing `MeshVertexBufferLayout` is too expensive to do for every entity, every frame. To make this scalable, I added a generalized "pre-hashing" solution to `bevy_utils`: `Hashed<T>` keys and `PreHashMap<K, V>` (which uses `Hashed<T>` internally) . Why didn't I just do the quick and dirty in-place "pre-compute hash and use that u64 as a key in a hashmap" that we've done in the past? Because its wrong! Hashes by themselves aren't enough because two different values can produce the same hash. Re-hashing a hash is even worse! I decided to build a generalized solution because this pattern has come up in the past and we've chosen to do the wrong thing. Now we can do the right thing! This did unfortunately require pulling in `hashbrown` and using that in `bevy_utils`, because avoiding re-hashes requires the `raw_entry_mut` api, which isn't stabilized yet (and may never be ... `entry_ref` has favor now, but also isn't available yet). If std's HashMap ever provides the tools we need, we can move back to that. Note that adding `hashbrown` doesn't increase our dependency count because it was already in our tree. I will probably break these changes out into their own PR.
* Specializing on `MeshVertexBufferLayout` has one non-obvious behavior: it can produce identical pipelines for two different MeshVertexBufferLayouts. To optimize the number of active pipelines / reduce re-binds while drawing, I de-duplicate pipelines post-specialization using the final `VertexBufferLayout` as the key. For example, consider a pipeline that needs the layout `(position, normal)` and is specialized using two meshes: `(position, normal, uv)` and `(position, normal, other_vec2)`. If both of these meshes result in `(position, normal)` specializations, we can use the same pipeline! Now we do. Cool!
To briefly illustrate, this is what the relevant section of `MeshPipeline`'s specialization code looks like now:
```rust
impl SpecializedMeshPipeline for MeshPipeline {
type Key = MeshPipelineKey;
fn specialize(
&self,
key: Self::Key,
layout: &MeshVertexBufferLayout,
) -> RenderPipelineDescriptor {
let mut vertex_attributes = vec![
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_POSITION.at_shader_location(0),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL.at_shader_location(1),
Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_UV_0.at_shader_location(2),
];
let mut shader_defs = Vec::new();
if layout.contains(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT) {
shader_defs.push(String::from("VERTEX_TANGENTS"));
vertex_attributes.push(Mesh::ATTRIBUTE_TANGENT.at_shader_location(3));
}
let vertex_buffer_layout = layout
.get_layout(&vertex_attributes)
.expect("Mesh is missing a vertex attribute");
```
Notice that this is _much_ simpler than it was before. And now any mesh with any layout can be used with this pipeline, provided it has vertex postions, normals, and uvs. We even got to remove `HAS_TANGENTS` from MeshPipelineKey and `has_tangents` from `GpuMesh`, because that information is redundant with `MeshVertexBufferLayout`.
This is still a draft because I still need to:
* Add more docs
* Experiment with adding error handling to mesh pipeline specialization (which would print errors at runtime when a mesh is missing a vertex attribute required by a pipeline). If it doesn't tank perf, we'll keep it.
* Consider breaking out the PreHash / hashbrown changes into a separate PR.
* Add an example illustrating this change
* Verify that the "mesh-specialized pipeline de-duplication code" works properly
Please dont yell at me for not doing these things yet :) Just trying to get this in peoples' hands asap.
Alternative to #3120Fixes#3030
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
This makes the [New Bevy Renderer](#2535) the default (and only) renderer. The new renderer isn't _quite_ ready for the final release yet, but I want as many people as possible to start testing it so we can identify bugs and address feedback prior to release.
The examples are all ported over and operational with a few exceptions:
* I removed a good portion of the examples in the `shader` folder. We still have some work to do in order to make these examples possible / ergonomic / worthwhile: #3120 and "high level shader material plugins" are the big ones. This is a temporary measure.
* Temporarily removed the multiple_windows example: doing this properly in the new renderer will require the upcoming "render targets" changes. Same goes for the render_to_texture example.
* Removed z_sort_debug: entity visibility sort info is no longer available in app logic. we could do this on the "render app" side, but i dont consider it a priority.
