# Objective
Currently, the observer API looks like this:
```rust
app.add_observer(|trigger: Trigger<Explode>| {
info!("Entity {} exploded!", trigger.target());
});
```
Future plans for observers also include "multi-event observers" with a
trigger that looks like this (see [Cart's
example](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/14649#issuecomment-2960402508)):
```rust
trigger: Trigger<(
OnAdd<Pressed>,
OnRemove<Pressed>,
OnAdd<InteractionDisabled>,
OnRemove<InteractionDisabled>,
OnInsert<Hovered>,
)>,
```
In scenarios like this, there is a lot of repetition of `On`. These are
expected to be very high-traffic APIs especially in UI contexts, so
ergonomics and readability are critical.
By renaming `Trigger` to `On`, we can make these APIs read more cleanly
and get rid of the repetition:
```rust
app.add_observer(|trigger: On<Explode>| {
info!("Entity {} exploded!", trigger.target());
});
```
```rust
trigger: On<(
Add<Pressed>,
Remove<Pressed>,
Add<InteractionDisabled>,
Remove<InteractionDisabled>,
Insert<Hovered>,
)>,
```
Names like `On<Add<Pressed>>` emphasize the actual event listener nature
more than `Trigger<OnAdd<Pressed>>`, and look cleaner. This *also* frees
up the `Trigger` name if we want to use it for the observer event type,
splitting them out from buffered events (bikeshedding this is out of
scope for this PR though).
For prior art:
[`bevy_eventlistener`](https://github.com/aevyrie/bevy_eventlistener)
used
[`On`](https://docs.rs/bevy_eventlistener/latest/bevy_eventlistener/event_listener/struct.On.html)
for its event listener type. Though in our case, the observer is the
event listener, and `On` is just a type containing information about the
triggered event.
## Solution
Steal from `bevy_event_listener` by @aevyrie and use `On`.
- Rename `Trigger` to `On`
- Rename `OnAdd` to `Add`
- Rename `OnInsert` to `Insert`
- Rename `OnReplace` to `Replace`
- Rename `OnRemove` to `Remove`
- Rename `OnDespawn` to `Despawn`
## Discussion
### Naming Conflicts??
Using a name like `Add` might initially feel like a very bad idea, since
it risks conflict with `core::ops::Add`. However, I don't expect this to
be a big problem in practice.
- You rarely need to actually implement the `Add` trait, especially in
modules that would use the Bevy ECS.
- In the rare cases where you *do* get a conflict, it is very easy to
fix by just disambiguating, for example using `ops::Add`.
- The `Add` event is a struct while the `Add` trait is a trait (duh), so
the compiler error should be very obvious.
For the record, renaming `OnAdd` to `Add`, I got exactly *zero* errors
or conflicts within Bevy itself. But this is of course not entirely
representative of actual projects *using* Bevy.
You might then wonder, why not use `Added`? This would conflict with the
`Added` query filter, so it wouldn't work. Additionally, the current
naming convention for observer events does not use past tense.
### Documentation
This does make documentation slightly more awkward when referring to
`On` or its methods. Previous docs often referred to `Trigger::target`
or "sends a `Trigger`" (which is... a bit strange anyway), which would
now be `On::target` and "sends an observer `Event`".
You can see the diff in this PR to see some of the effects. I think it
should be fine though, we may just need to reword more documentation to
read better.
# Objective
`Entity::PLACEHOLDER` acts as a magic number that will *probably* never
really exist, but it certainly could. And, `Entity` has a niche, so the
only reason to use `PLACEHOLDER` is as an alternative to `MaybeUninit`
that trades safety risks for logic risks.
As a result, bevy has generally advised against using `PLACEHOLDER`, but
we still use if for a lot internally. This pr starts removing internal
uses of it, starting from observers.
## Solution
Change all trigger target related types from `Entity` to
`Option<Entity>`
Small migration guide to come.
## Testing
CI
## Future Work
This turned a lot of code from
```rust
trigger.target()
```
to
```rust
trigger.target().unwrap()
```
The extra panic is no worse than before; it's just earlier than
panicking after passing the placeholder to something else.
But this is kinda annoying.
I would like to add a `TriggerMode` or something to `Event` that would
restrict what kinds of targets can be used for that event. Many events
like `Removed` etc, are always triggered with a target. We can make
those have a way to assume Some, etc. But I wanted to save that for a
future pr.
# Objective
As discussed in #14275, Bevy is currently too prone to panic, and makes
the easy / beginner-friendly way to do a large number of operations just
to panic on failure.
This is seriously frustrating in library code, but also slows down
development, as many of the `Query::single` panics can actually safely
be an early return (these panics are often due to a small ordering issue
or a change in game state.
More critically, in most "finished" products, panics are unacceptable:
any unexpected failures should be handled elsewhere. That's where the
new
With the advent of good system error handling, we can now remove this.
Note: I was instrumental in a) introducing this idea in the first place
and b) pushing to make the panicking variant the default. The
introduction of both `let else` statements in Rust and the fancy system
error handling work in 0.16 have changed my mind on the right balance
here.
## Solution
1. Make `Query::single` and `Query::single_mut` (and other random
related methods) return a `Result`.
2. Handle all of Bevy's internal usage of these APIs.
3. Deprecate `Query::get_single` and friends, since we've moved their
functionality to the nice names.
4. Add detailed advice on how to best handle these errors.
Generally I like the diff here, although `get_single().unwrap()` in
tests is a bit of a downgrade.
## Testing
I've done a global search for `.single` to track down any missed
deprecated usages.
As to whether or not all the migrations were successful, that's what CI
is for :)
## Future work
~~Rename `Query::get_single` and friends to `Query::single`!~~
~~I've opted not to do this in this PR, and smear it across two releases
in order to ease the migration. Successive deprecations are much easier
to manage than the semantics and types shifting under your feet.~~
Cart has convinced me to change my mind on this; see
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/18082#discussion_r1974536085.
## Migration guide
`Query::single`, `Query::single_mut` and their `QueryState` equivalents
now return a `Result`. Generally, you'll want to:
1. Use Bevy 0.16's system error handling to return a `Result` using the
`?` operator.
2. Use a `let else Ok(data)` block to early return if it's an expected
failure.
3. Use `unwrap()` or `Ok` destructuring inside of tests.
The old `Query::get_single` (etc) methods which did this have been
deprecated.
# Objective
The entity disabling / default query filter work added in #17514 and
#13120 is neat, but we don't teach users how it works!
We should fix that before 0.16.
## Solution
Write a simple example to teach the basics of entity disabling!
## Testing
`cargo run --example entity_disabling`
## Showcase
---------
Co-authored-by: Zachary Harrold <zac@harrold.com.au>
