93ce266c90
14 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. |
||
|
Joona Aalto
|
7b1c9f192e
|
Adopt consistent FooSystems naming convention for system sets (#18900)
# 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 |
||
|
raldone01
|
1b7db895b7
|
Harden proc macro path resolution and add integration tests. (#17330)
This pr uses the `extern crate self as` trick to make proc macros behave the same way inside and outside bevy. # Objective - Removes noise introduced by `crate as` in the whole bevy repo. - Fixes #17004. - Hardens proc macro path resolution. ## TODO - [x] `BevyManifest` needs cleanup. - [x] Cleanup remaining `crate as`. - [x] Add proper integration tests to the ci. ## Notes - `cargo-manifest-proc-macros` is written by me and based/inspired by the old `BevyManifest` implementation and [`bkchr/proc-macro-crate`](https://github.com/bkchr/proc-macro-crate). - What do you think about the new integration test machinery I added to the `ci`? More and better integration tests can be added at a later stage. The goal of these integration tests is to simulate an actual separate crate that uses bevy. Ideally they would lightly touch all bevy crates. ## Testing - Needs RA test - Needs testing from other users - Others need to run at least `cargo run -p ci integration-test` and verify that they work. --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> |
||
|
MichiRecRoom
|
17c46f4add
|
bevy_ecs: Apply #![warn(clippy::allow_attributes, clippy::allow_attributes_without_reason)] (#17335)
# Objective - https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/17111 ## Solution Set the `clippy::allow_attributes` and `clippy::allow_attributes_without_reason` lints to `warn`, and bring `bevy_ecs` in line with the new restrictions. ## Testing This PR is a WIP; testing will happen after it's finished. |
||
|
Zachary Harrold
|
0403948aa2
|
Remove Implicit std Prelude from no_std Crates (#17086)
# Background In `no_std` compatible crates, there is often an `std` feature which will allow access to the standard library. Currently, with the `std` feature _enabled_, the [`std::prelude`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/prelude/index.html) is implicitly imported in all modules. With the feature _disabled_, instead the [`core::prelude`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/core/prelude/index.html) is implicitly imported. This creates a subtle and pervasive issue where `alloc` items _may_ be implicitly included (if `std` is enabled), or must be explicitly included (if `std` is not enabled). # Objective - Make the implicit imports for `no_std` crates consistent regardless of what features are/not enabled. ## Solution - Replace the `cfg_attr` "double negative" `no_std` attribute with conditional compilation to _include_ `std` as an external crate. ```rust // Before #![cfg_attr(not(feature = "std"), no_std)] // After #![no_std] #[cfg(feature = "std")] extern crate std; ``` - Fix imports that are currently broken but are only now visible with the above fix. ## Testing - CI ## Notes I had previously used the "double negative" version of `no_std` based on general consensus that it was "cleaner" within the Rust embedded community. However, this implicit prelude issue likely was considered when forming this consensus. I believe the reason why is the items most affected by this issue are provided by the `alloc` crate, which is rarely used within embedded but extensively used within Bevy. |
||
|
JaySpruce
|
9ac7e17f2e
|
Refactor hierarchy-related commands to remove structs (#17029)
## Objective Continuation of #16999. This PR handles the following: - Many hierarchy-related commands are wrappers around `World` and `EntityWorldMut` methods and can be moved to closures: - `AddChild` - `InsertChildren` - `AddChildren` - `RemoveChildren` - `ClearChildren` - `ReplaceChildren` - `RemoveParent` - `DespawnRecursive` - `DespawnChildrenRecursive` - `AddChildInPlace` - `RemoveParentInPlace` - `SendEvent` is a wrapper around `World` methods and can be moved to a closure (and its file deleted). ## Migration Guide If you were queuing the structs of hierarchy-related commands or `SendEvent` directly, you will need to change them to the methods implemented on `EntityCommands` (or `Commands` for `SendEvent`): | Struct | Method | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | `commands.queue(AddChild { child, parent });` | `commands.entity(parent).add_child(child);` OR `commands.entity(child).set_parent(parent);` | | `commands.queue(AddChildren { children, parent });` | `commands.entity(parent).add_children(children);` | | `commands.queue(InsertChildren { children, parent });` | `commands.entity(parent).insert_children(children);` | | `commands.queue(RemoveChildren { children, parent });` | `commands.entity(parent).remove_children(children);` | | `commands.queue(ReplaceChildren { children, parent });` | `commands.entity(parent).replace_children(children);` | | `commands.queue(ClearChildren { parent });` | `commands.entity(parent).clear_children();` | | `commands.queue(RemoveParent { child });` | `commands.entity(child).remove_parent()` | | `commands.queue(DespawnRecursive { entity, warn: true });` | `commands.entity(entity).despawn_recursive();` | | `commands.queue(DespawnRecursive { entity, warn: false });` | `commands.entity(entity).try_despawn_recursive();` | | `commands.queue(DespawnChildrenRecursive { entity, warn: true });` | `commands.entity(entity).despawn_descendants();` | | `commands.queue(DespawnChildrenRecursive { entity, warn: false});` | `commands.entity(entity).try_despawn_descendants();` | | `commands.queue(SendEvent { event });` | `commands.send_event(event);` | |
||
|
Zachary Harrold
|
d70595b667
|
Add core and alloc over std Lints (#15281)
# Objective - Fixes #6370 - Closes #6581 ## Solution - Added the following lints to the workspace: - `std_instead_of_core` - `std_instead_of_alloc` - `alloc_instead_of_core` - Used `cargo +nightly fmt` with [item level use formatting](https://rust-lang.github.io/rustfmt/?version=v1.6.0&search=#Item%5C%3A) to split all `use` statements into single items. - Used `cargo clippy --workspace --all-targets --all-features --fix --allow-dirty` to _attempt_ to resolve the new linting issues, and intervened where the lint was unable to resolve the issue automatically (usually due to needing an `extern crate alloc;` statement in a crate root). - Manually removed certain uses of `std` where negative feature gating prevented `--all-features` from finding the offending uses. - Used `cargo +nightly fmt` with [crate level use formatting](https://rust-lang.github.io/rustfmt/?version=v1.6.0&search=#Crate%5C%3A) to re-merge all `use` statements matching Bevy's previous styling. - Manually fixed cases where the `fmt` tool could not re-merge `use` statements due to conditional compilation attributes. ## Testing - Ran CI locally ## Migration Guide The MSRV is now 1.81. Please update to this version or higher. ## Notes - This is a _massive_ change to try and push through, which is why I've outlined the semi-automatic steps I used to create this PR, in case this fails and someone else tries again in the future. - Making this change has no impact on user code, but does mean Bevy contributors will be warned to use `core` and `alloc` instead of `std` where possible. - This lint is a critical first step towards investigating `no_std` options for Bevy. --------- Co-authored-by: François Mockers <francois.mockers@vleue.com> |
||
|
robtfm
|
45281e62d7
|
Commands::send_event (#14933)
# Objective
sending events tends to be low-frequency so ergonomics can be
prioritized over efficiency.
add `Commands::send_event` to send any type of event without needing a
writer in hand.
i don't know how we feel about these kind of ergonomic things, i add
this to all my projects and find it useful. adding `mut
this_particular_event_writer: EventWriter<ThisParticularEvent>` every
time i want to send something is unnecessarily cumbersome.
it also simplifies the "send and receive in the same system" pattern
significantly.
basic example before:
```rs
fn my_func(
q: Query<(Entity, &State)>,
mut damage_event_writer: EventWriter<DamageEvent>,
mut heal_event_writer: EventWriter<HealEvent>,
) {
for (entity, state) in q.iter() {
if let Some(damage) = state.get_damage() {
damage_event_writer.send(DamageEvent { entity, damage });
}
if let Some(heal) = state.get_heal() {
heal_event_writer.send(HealEvent { entity, heal });
}
}
}
```
basic example after:
```rs
import bevy::ecs::event::SendEventEx;
fn my_func(
mut commands: Commands,
q: Query<(Entity, &State)>,
) {
for (entity, state) in q.iter() {
if let Some(damage) = state.get_damage() {
commands.send_event(DamageEvent { entity, damage });
}
if let Some(heal) = state.get_heal() {
commands.send_event(HealEvent { entity, heal });
}
}
}
```
send/receive in the same system before:
```rs
fn send_and_receive_param_set(
mut param_set: ParamSet<(EventReader<DebugEvent>, EventWriter<DebugEvent>)>,
) {
// We must collect the events to resend, because we can't access the writer while we're iterating over the reader.
let mut events_to_resend = Vec::new();
// This is p0, as the first parameter in the `ParamSet` is the reader.
for event in param_set.p0().read() {
if event.resend_from_param_set {
events_to_resend.push(event.clone());
}
}
// This is p1, as the second parameter in the `ParamSet` is the writer.
for mut event in events_to_resend {
event.times_sent += 1;
param_set.p1().send(event);
}
}
```
after:
```rs
use bevy::ecs::event::SendEventEx;
fn send_via_commands_and_receive(
mut reader: EventReader<DebugEvent>,
mut commands: Commands,
) {
for event in reader.read() {
if event.resend_via_commands {
commands.send_event(DebugEvent {
times_sent: event.times_sent + 1,
..event.clone()
});
}
}
}
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Jan Hohenheim <jan@hohenheim.ch>
|
||
|
Bob Gardner
|
ec1aa48fc6
|
Created an EventMutator for when you want to mutate an event before reading (#13818)
# Objective - Often in games you will want to create chains of systems that modify some event. For example, a chain of damage systems that handle a DamageEvent and modify the underlying value before the health system finally consumes the event. Right now this requires either: * Using a component added to the entity * Consuming and refiring events Neither is ideal when really all we want to do is read the events value, modify it, and write it back. ## Solution - Create an EventMutator class similar to EventReader but with ResMut<T> and iterators that return &mut so that events can be mutated. ## Testing - I replicated all the existing tests for EventReader to make sure behavior was the same (I believe) and added a number of tests specific to testing that 1) events can actually be mutated, and that 2) EventReader sees changes from EventMutator for events it hasn't already seen. ## Migration Guide Users currently using `ManualEventReader` should use `EventCursor` instead. `ManualEventReader` will be removed in Bevy 0.16. Additionally, `Events::get_reader` has been replaced by `Events::get_cursor`. Users currently directly accessing the `Events` resource for mutation should move to `EventMutator` if possible. --------- Co-authored-by: poopy <gonesbird@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> |
||
|
Lee-Orr
|
bd7dcd3f6d
|
deregister events (#14083)
# Objective Add ability to de-register events from the EventRegistry (and the associated World). The initial reasoning relates to retaining support for Event hot reloading in `dexterous_developer`. ## Solution Add a `deregister_events<T: Event>(&mut world)` method to the `EventRegistry` struct. ## Testing Added an automated test that verifies the event registry adds and removes `Events<T>` from the world. --------- Co-authored-by: BD103 <59022059+BD103@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Lura
|
856b39d821
|
Apply Clippy lints regarding lazy evaluation and closures (#14015)
# Objective - Lazily evaluate [default](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/unwrap_or_default)~~/[or](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/or_fun_call)~~ values where it makes sense - ~~`unwrap_or(foo())` -> `unwrap_or_else(|| foo())`~~ - `unwrap_or(Default::default())` -> `unwrap_or_default()` - etc. - Avoid creating [redundant closures](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/redundant_closure), even for [method calls](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/redundant_closure_for_method_calls) - `map(|something| something.into())` -> `map(Into:into)` ## Solution - Apply Clippy lints: - ~~[or_fun_call](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/or_fun_call)~~ - [unwrap_or_default](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/unwrap_or_default) - [redundant_closure_for_method_calls](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/redundant_closure_for_method_calls) ([redundant closures](https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/redundant_closure) is already enabled) ## Testing - Tested on Windows 11 (`stable-x86_64-pc-windows-gnu`, 1.79.0) - Bevy compiles without errors or warnings and examples seem to work as intended - `cargo clippy` ✅ - `cargo run -p ci -- compile` ✅ --------- Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com> |
||
|
Bob Gardner
|
4c3b4a445d
|
Mark events as read during EventReader::par_read (#13836)
# Objective - Fix issue #13821 ## Solution - Rewrote the test to ensure that it actually tests the functionality correctly. Then made the par_read function correctly change the values of self.reader.last_event_count. ## Testing - Rewrote the test for par_read to run the system schedule twice, checking the output each time --------- Co-authored-by: Martín Maita <47983254+mnmaita@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Alice Cecile
|
2cffd14923
|
Ensure that events are updated even when using a bare-bones Bevy App (#13808)
# Objective As discovered in https://github.com/Leafwing-Studios/leafwing-input-manager/issues/538, there appears to be some real weirdness going on in how event updates are processed between Bevy 0.13 and Bevy 0.14. To identify the cause and prevent regression, I've added tests to validate the intended behavior. My initial suspicion was that this would be fixed by https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/13762, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Instead, events appear to never be updated at all when using `bevy_app` by itself. This is part of the problem resolved by https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/11528, and introduced by https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/10077. After some investigation, it appears that `signal_event_update_system` is never added using a bare-bones `App`, and so event updates are always skipped. This can be worked around by adding your own copy to a later-in-the-frame schedule, but that's not a very good fix. ## Solution Ensure that if we're not using a `FixedUpdate` schedule, events are always updated every frame. To do this, I've modified the logic of `event_update_condition` and `event_update_system` to clearly and correctly differentiate between the two cases: where we're waiting for a "you should update now" signal and where we simply don't care. To encode this, I've added the `ShouldUpdateEvents` enum, replacing a simple `bool` in `EventRegistry`'s `needs_update` field. Now, both tests pass as expected, without having to manually add a system! ## Testing I've written two parallel unit tests to cover the intended behavior: 1. Test that `iter_current_update_events` works as expected in `bevy_ecs`. 2. Test that `iter_current_update_events` works as expected in `bevy_app` I've also added a test to verify that event updating works correctly in the presence of a fixed main schedule, and a second test to verify that fixed updating works at all to help future authors narrow down failures. ## Outstanding - [x] figure out why the `bevy_app` version of this test fails but the `bevy_ecs` version does not - [x] figure out why `EventRegistry::run_updates` isn't working properly - [x] figure out why `EventRegistry::run_updates` is never getting called - [x] figure out why `event_update_condition` is always returning false - [x] figure out why `EventRegistry::needs_update` is always false - [x] verify that the problem is a missing `signal_events_update_system` --------- Co-authored-by: Mike <mike.hsu@gmail.com> |
||
|
Bob Gardner
|
2ccdae7489
|
Split event.rs into a full module. (#13801)
# Objective - Split the bevy_ecs::events module so it's easier to work with ## Solution - Split the event.rs file across multiple files, made sure all tests passed, and exports from the module were the same as previous ## Testing - All automated tests pass. |