# Objective
- Fix issue where `SubStates` depending on multiple source states would
only react when _all_ source states changed simultaneously.
- SubStates should be created/destroyed whenever _any_ of their source
states transitions, not only when all change together.
# Solution
- Changed the "did parent change" detection logic from AND to OR. We
need to check if _any_ of the event readers changed, not if _all_ of
them changed.
- See
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/actions/runs/15610159742/job/43968937544?pr=19595
for failing test proof before I pushed the fix.
- The generated code we want needs `||`s not `&&`s like this:
```rust
fn register_sub_state_systems_in_schedule<T: SubStates<SourceStates = Self>>(schedule: &mut Schedule) {
let apply_state_transition = |(mut ereader0, mut ereader1, mut ereader2): (
EventReader<StateTransitionEvent<S0::RawState>>,
EventReader<StateTransitionEvent<S1::RawState>>,
EventReader<StateTransitionEvent<S2::RawState>>,
),
event: EventWriter<StateTransitionEvent<T>>,
commands: Commands,
current_state_res: Option<ResMut<State<T>>>,
next_state_res: Option<ResMut<NextState<T>>>,
(s0, s1, s2): (
Option<Res<State<S0::RawState>>>,
Option<Res<State<S1::RawState>>>,
Option<Res<State<S2::RawState>>>,
)| {
// With `||` we can correctly count parent changed if any of the sources changed.
let parent_changed = (ereader0.read().last().is_some()
|| ereader1.read().last().is_some()
|| ereader2.read().last().is_some());
let next_state = take_next_state(next_state_res);
if !parent_changed && next_state.is_none() {
return;
}
// ...
}
}
```
# Testing
- Add new test.
- Check the fix worked in my game.
# Objective
Fixes a part of #14274.
Bevy has an incredibly inconsistent naming convention for its system
sets, both internally and across the ecosystem.
<img alt="System sets in Bevy"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d16e2027-793f-4ba4-9cc9-e780b14a5a1b"
width="450" />
*Names of public system set types in Bevy*
Most Bevy types use a naming of `FooSystem` or just `Foo`, but there are
also a few `FooSystems` and `FooSet` types. In ecosystem crates on the
other hand, `FooSet` is perhaps the most commonly used name in general.
Conventions being so wildly inconsistent can make it harder for users to
pick names for their own types, to search for system sets on docs.rs, or
to even discern which types *are* system sets.
To reign in the inconsistency a bit and help unify the ecosystem, it
would be good to establish a common recommended naming convention for
system sets in Bevy itself, similar to how plugins are commonly suffixed
with `Plugin` (ex: `TimePlugin`). By adopting a consistent naming
convention in first-party Bevy, we can softly nudge ecosystem crates to
follow suit (for types where it makes sense to do so).
Choosing a naming convention is also relevant now, as the [`bevy_cli`
recently adopted
lints](https://github.com/TheBevyFlock/bevy_cli/pull/345) to enforce
naming for plugins and system sets, and the recommended naming used for
system sets is still a bit open.
## Which Name To Use?
Now the contentious part: what naming convention should we actually
adopt?
This was discussed on the Bevy Discord at the end of last year, starting
[here](<https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/692572690833473578/1310659954683936789>).
`FooSet` and `FooSystems` were the clear favorites, with `FooSet` very
narrowly winning an unofficial poll. However, it seems to me like the
consensus was broadly moving towards `FooSystems` at the end and after
the poll, with Cart
([source](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/692572690833473578/1311140204974706708))
and later Alice
([source](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/692572690833473578/1311092530732859533))
and also me being in favor of it.
Let's do a quick pros and cons list! Of course these are just what I
thought of, so take it with a grain of salt.
`FooSet`:
- Pro: Nice and short!
- Pro: Used by many ecosystem crates.
- Pro: The `Set` suffix comes directly from the trait name `SystemSet`.
- Pro: Pairs nicely with existing APIs like `in_set` and
`configure_sets`.
- Con: `Set` by itself doesn't actually indicate that it's related to
systems *at all*, apart from the implemented trait. A set of what?
- Con: Is `FooSet` a set of `Foo`s or a system set related to `Foo`? Ex:
`ContactSet`, `MeshSet`, `EnemySet`...
`FooSystems`:
- Pro: Very clearly indicates that the type represents a collection of
systems. The actual core concept, system(s), is in the name.
- Pro: Parallels nicely with `FooPlugins` for plugin groups.
- Pro: Low risk of conflicts with other names or misunderstandings about
what the type is.
- Pro: In most cases, reads *very* nicely and clearly. Ex:
`PhysicsSystems` and `AnimationSystems` as opposed to `PhysicsSet` and
`AnimationSet`.
- Pro: Easy to search for on docs.rs.
- Con: Usually results in longer names.
- Con: Not yet as widely used.
Really the big problem with `FooSet` is that it doesn't actually
describe what it is. It describes what *kind of thing* it is (a set of
something), but not *what it is a set of*, unless you know the type or
check its docs or implemented traits. `FooSystems` on the other hand is
much more self-descriptive in this regard, at the cost of being a bit
longer to type.
Ultimately, in some ways it comes down to preference and how you think
of system sets. Personally, I was originally in favor of `FooSet`, but
have been increasingly on the side of `FooSystems`, especially after
seeing what the new names would actually look like in Avian and now
Bevy. I prefer it because it usually reads better, is much more clearly
related to groups of systems than `FooSet`, and overall *feels* more
correct and natural to me in the long term.
For these reasons, and because Alice and Cart also seemed to share a
preference for it when it was previously being discussed, I propose that
we adopt a `FooSystems` naming convention where applicable.
## Solution
Rename Bevy's system set types to use a consistent `FooSet` naming where
applicable.
- `AccessibilitySystem` → `AccessibilitySystems`
- `GizmoRenderSystem` → `GizmoRenderSystems`
- `PickSet` → `PickingSystems`
- `RunFixedMainLoopSystem` → `RunFixedMainLoopSystems`
- `TransformSystem` → `TransformSystems`
- `RemoteSet` → `RemoteSystems`
- `RenderSet` → `RenderSystems`
- `SpriteSystem` → `SpriteSystems`
- `StateTransitionSteps` → `StateTransitionSystems`
- `RenderUiSystem` → `RenderUiSystems`
- `UiSystem` → `UiSystems`
- `Animation` → `AnimationSystems`
- `AssetEvents` → `AssetEventSystems`
- `TrackAssets` → `AssetTrackingSystems`
- `UpdateGizmoMeshes` → `GizmoMeshSystems`
- `InputSystem` → `InputSystems`
- `InputFocusSet` → `InputFocusSystems`
- `ExtractMaterialsSet` → `MaterialExtractionSystems`
- `ExtractMeshesSet` → `MeshExtractionSystems`
- `RumbleSystem` → `RumbleSystems`
- `CameraUpdateSystem` → `CameraUpdateSystems`
- `ExtractAssetsSet` → `AssetExtractionSystems`
- `Update2dText` → `Text2dUpdateSystems`
- `TimeSystem` → `TimeSystems`
- `AudioPlaySet` → `AudioPlaybackSystems`
- `SendEvents` → `EventSenderSystems`
- `EventUpdates` → `EventUpdateSystems`
A lot of the names got slightly longer, but they are also a lot more
consistent, and in my opinion the majority of them read much better. For
a few of the names I took the liberty of rewording things a bit;
definitely open to any further naming improvements.
There are still also cases where the `FooSystems` naming doesn't really
make sense, and those I left alone. This primarily includes system sets
like `Interned<dyn SystemSet>`, `EnterSchedules<S>`, `ExitSchedules<S>`,
or `TransitionSchedules<S>`, where the type has some special purpose and
semantics.
## Todo
- [x] Should I keep all the old names as deprecated type aliases? I can
do this, but to avoid wasting work I'd prefer to first reach consensus
on whether these renames are even desired.
- [x] Migration guide
- [x] Release notes
# Objective
Prevents duplicate implementation between IntoSystemConfigs and
IntoSystemSetConfigs using a generic, adds a NodeType trait for more
config flexibility (opening the door to implement
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/14195?).
## Solution
Followed writeup by @ItsDoot:
https://hackmd.io/@doot/rJeefFHc1x
Removes IntoSystemConfigs and IntoSystemSetConfigs, instead using
IntoNodeConfigs with generics.
## Testing
Pending
---
## Showcase
N/A
## Migration Guide
SystemSetConfigs -> NodeConfigs<InternedSystemSet>
SystemConfigs -> NodeConfigs<ScheduleSystem>
IntoSystemSetConfigs -> IntoNodeConfigs<InternedSystemSet, M>
IntoSystemConfigs -> IntoNodeConfigs<ScheduleSystem, M>
---------
Co-authored-by: Christian Hughes <9044780+ItsDoot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
# Objective
Fixes#15941
## Solution
Created https://crates.io/crates/variadics_please and moved the code
there; updating references
`bevy_utils/macros` is deleted.
## Testing
cargo check
## Migration Guide
Use `variadics_please::{all_tuples, all_tuples_with_size}` instead of
`bevy::utils::{all_tuples, all_tuples_with_size}`.
# Objective
Bevy seems to want to standardize on "American English" spellings. Not
sure if this is laid out anywhere in writing, but see also #15947.
While perusing the docs for `typos`, I noticed that it has a `locale`
config option and tried it out.
## Solution
Switch to `en-us` locale in the `typos` config and run `typos -w`
## Migration Guide
The following methods or fields have been renamed from `*dependants*` to
`*dependents*`.
- `ProcessorAssetInfo::dependants`
- `ProcessorAssetInfos::add_dependant`
- `ProcessorAssetInfos::non_existent_dependants`
- `AssetInfo::dependants_waiting_on_load`
- `AssetInfo::dependants_waiting_on_recursive_dep_load`
- `AssetInfos::loader_dependants`
- `AssetInfos::remove_dependants_and_labels`
# Objective
Fixes#14782
## Solution
Enable the lint and fix all upcoming hints (`--fix`). Also tried to
figure out the false-positive (see review comment). Maybe split this PR
up into multiple parts where only the last one enables the lint, so some
can already be merged resulting in less many files touched / less
potential for merge conflicts?
Currently, there are some cases where it might be easier to read the
code with the qualifier, so perhaps remove the import of it and adapt
its cases? In the current stage it's just a plain adoption of the
suggestions in order to have a base to discuss.
## Testing
`cargo clippy` and `cargo run -p ci` are happy.
# Objective
- Fixes#14697
## Solution
This PR modifies the existing `all_tuples!` macro to optionally accept a
`#[doc(fake_variadic)]` attribute in its input. If the attribute is
present, each invocation of the impl macro gets the correct attributes
(i.e. the first impl receives `#[doc(fake_variadic)]` while the other
impls are hidden using `#[doc(hidden)]`.
Impls for the empty tuple (unit type) are left untouched (that's what
the [standard
library](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/cmp/trait.PartialEq.html#impl-PartialEq-for-())
and
[serde](https://docs.rs/serde/latest/serde/trait.Serialize.html#impl-Serialize-for-())
do).
To work around https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/8811 and to get
impls on re-exports to correctly show up as variadic, `--cfg docsrs_dep`
is passed when building the docs for the toplevel `bevy` crate.
`#[doc(fake_variadic)]` only works on tuples and fn pointers, so impls
for structs like `AnyOf<(T1, T2, ..., Tn)>` are unchanged.
## Testing
I built the docs locally using `RUSTDOCFLAGS='--cfg docsrs'
RUSTFLAGS='--cfg docsrs_dep' cargo +nightly doc --no-deps --workspace`
and checked the documentation page of a trait both in its original crate
and the re-exported version in `bevy`.
The description should correctly mention for how many tuple items the
trait is implemented.
I added `rustc-args` for docs.rs to the `bevy` crate, I hope there
aren't any other notable crates that re-export `#[doc(fake_variadic)]`
traits.
---
## Showcase
`bevy_ecs::query::QueryData`:
<img width="1015" alt="Screenshot 2024-08-12 at 16 41 28"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d40136ed-6731-475f-91a0-9df255cd24e3">
`bevy::ecs::query::QueryData` (re-export):
<img width="1005" alt="Screenshot 2024-08-12 at 16 42 57"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/71d44cf0-0ab0-48b0-9a51-5ce332594e12">
## Original Description
<details>
Resolves#14697
Submitting as a draft for now, very WIP.
Unfortunately, the docs don't show the variadics nicely when looking at
reexported items.
For example:
`bevy_ecs::bundle::Bundle` correctly shows the variadic impl:
while `bevy::ecs::bundle::Bundle` (the reexport) shows all the impls
(not good):
Built using `RUSTDOCFLAGS='--cfg docsrs' cargo +nightly doc --workspace
--no-deps` (`--no-deps` because of wgpu-core).
Maybe I missed something or this is a limitation in the *totally not
private* `#[doc(fake_variadic)]` thingy. In any case I desperately need
some sleep now :))
</details>
# Objective
Fixes#13711
## Solution
Introduce smaller, generic system sets for each schedule variant, which
are ordered against other generic variants:
- `ExitSchedules<S>` - For `OnExit` schedules, runs from leaf states to
root states.
- `TransitionSchedules<S>` - For `OnTransition` schedules, runs in
arbitrary order.
- `EnterSchedules<S>` - For `OnEnter` schedules, runs from root states
to leaf states.
Also unified `ApplyStateTransition<S>` schedule which works in basically
the same way, just for internals.
## Testing
- One test that tests schedule execution order
---------
Co-authored-by: Lee-Orr <lee-orr@users.noreply.github.com>
# Objective
Small substate code cleanup.
1. Format closure arguments inside macros.
2. Replace `match bool` blocks with `if-else` blocks.
3. Replace `match` block in substate macro with the same one-liner as in
the non-macro version.
# Objective
Prerequisite to #13579.
Combine separate `Substates` transition systems to centralize transition
logic and exert more control over it.
## Solution
Originally the transition happened in 2 stages:
- `apply_state_transition` in `ManualTransitions` handled `NextState`,
- closure system in `DependentTransitions` handled parent-related
changes, insertion and deletion of the substate.
Now:
- Both transitions are processed in a single closure system during
`DependentTransitions`.
- Since `Substates` no longer use `ManualTransitions`, it's been renamed
to `RootTransitions`. Only root states use it.
- When `Substates` state comes into existence, it will try to initialize
from `NextState` and fallback to `should_exist` result.
- Remove `apply_state_transition` from public API.
Consequentially, removed the possibility of multiple
`StateTransitionEvent`s when both transition systems fire in a single
frame.
## Changelog
- Renamed `ManualTransitions` to `RootTransitions`.
- `Substates` will initialize their value with `NextState` if available
and fallback to `should_exist` result.
## Migration Guide
- `apply_state_transition` is no longer publicly available, run the
`StateTransition` schedule instead.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
# Objective
Prerequisite to #13579.
Make state transition schedule running simpler.
## Solution
- Remove `should_run_transition` which read the latest event and
fake-fire an event for the startup transitions (e.g. startup
`OnEnter()`).
- Account for startup event, by actually emitting an event when adding
states to `App`.
- Replace `should_run_transition` with `last_transition`, which is a
light wrapper over `EventReader::read().last()`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
# Objective
Extracts the state mechanisms into a new crate called "bevy_state".
This comes with a few goals:
- state wasn't really an inherent machinery of the ecs system, and so
keeping it within bevy_ecs felt forced
- by mixing it in with bevy_ecs, the maintainability of our more robust
state system was significantly compromised
moving state into a new crate makes it easier to encapsulate as it's own
feature, and easier to read and understand since it's no longer a
single, massive file.
## Solution
move the state-related elements from bevy_ecs to a new crate
## Testing
- Did you test these changes? If so, how? all the automated tests
migrated and passed, ran the pre-existing examples without changes to
validate.
---
## Migration Guide
Since bevy_state is now gated behind the `bevy_state` feature, projects
that use state but don't use the `default-features` will need to add
that feature flag.
Since it is no longer part of bevy_ecs, projects that use bevy_ecs
directly will need to manually pull in `bevy_state`, trigger the
StateTransition schedule, and handle any of the elements that bevy_app
currently sets up.
---------
Co-authored-by: Kristoffer Søholm <k.soeholm@gmail.com>
