b866bb4254
8 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 |
||
|
newclarityex
|
ecccd57417
|
Generic system config (#17962)
# 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> |
||
|
JaySpruce
|
d6db78b5dd
|
Replace internal uses of insert_or_spawn_batch (#18035)
## Objective `insert_or_spawn_batch` is due to be deprecated eventually (#15704), and removing uses internally will make that easier. ## Solution Replaced internal uses of `insert_or_spawn_batch` with `try_insert_batch` (non-panicking variant because `insert_or_spawn_batch` didn't panic). All of the internal uses are in rendering code. Since retained rendering was meant to get rid non-opaque entity IDs, I assume the code was just using `insert_or_spawn_batch` because `insert_batch` didn't exist and not because it actually wanted to spawn something. However, I am *not* confident in my ability to judge rendering code. |
||
|
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> |
||
|
Cameron
|
01649f13e2
|
Refactor App and SubApp internals for better separation (#9202)
# Objective This is a necessary precursor to #9122 (this was split from that PR to reduce the amount of code to review all at once). Moving `!Send` resource ownership to `App` will make it unambiguously `!Send`. `SubApp` must be `Send`, so it can't wrap `App`. ## Solution Refactor `App` and `SubApp` to not have a recursive relationship. Since `SubApp` no longer wraps `App`, once `!Send` resources are moved out of `World` and into `App`, `SubApp` will become unambiguously `Send`. There could be less code duplication between `App` and `SubApp`, but that would break `App` method chaining. ## Changelog - `SubApp` no longer wraps `App`. - `App` fields are no longer publicly accessible. - `App` can no longer be converted into a `SubApp`. - Various methods now return references to a `SubApp` instead of an `App`. ## Migration Guide - To construct a sub-app, use `SubApp::new()`. `App` can no longer convert into `SubApp`. - If you implemented a trait for `App`, you may want to implement it for `SubApp` as well. - If you're accessing `app.world` directly, you now have to use `app.world()` and `app.world_mut()`. - `App::sub_app` now returns `&SubApp`. - `App::sub_app_mut` now returns `&mut SubApp`. - `App::get_sub_app` now returns `Option<&SubApp>.` - `App::get_sub_app_mut` now returns `Option<&mut SubApp>.` |
||
|
James O'Brien
|
4f1d9a6315
|
Reorder render sets, refactor bevy_sprite to take advantage (#9236)
This is a continuation of this PR: #8062 # Objective - Reorder render schedule sets to allow data preparation when phase item order is known to support improved batching - Part of the batching/instancing etc plan from here: https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/89#issuecomment-1379249074 - The original idea came from @inodentry and proved to be a good one. Thanks! - Refactor `bevy_sprite` and `bevy_ui` to take advantage of the new ordering ## Solution - Move `Prepare` and `PrepareFlush` after `PhaseSortFlush` - Add a `PrepareAssets` set that runs in parallel with other systems and sets in the render schedule. - Put prepare_assets systems in the `PrepareAssets` set - If explicit dependencies are needed on Mesh or Material RenderAssets then depend on the appropriate system. - Add `ManageViews` and `ManageViewsFlush` sets between `ExtractCommands` and Queue - Move `queue_mesh*_bind_group` to the Prepare stage - Rename them to `prepare_` - Put systems that prepare resources (buffers, textures, etc.) into a `PrepareResources` set inside `Prepare` - Put the `prepare_..._bind_group` systems into a `PrepareBindGroup` set after `PrepareResources` - Move `prepare_lights` to the `ManageViews` set - `prepare_lights` creates views and this must happen before `Queue` - This system needs refactoring to stop handling all responsibilities - Gather lights, sort, and create shadow map views. Store sorted light entities in a resource - Remove `BatchedPhaseItem` - Replace `batch_range` with `batch_size` representing how many items to skip after rendering the item or to skip the item entirely if `batch_size` is 0. - `queue_sprites` has been split into `queue_sprites` for queueing phase items and `prepare_sprites` for batching after the `PhaseSort` - `PhaseItem`s are still inserted in `queue_sprites` - After sorting adjacent compatible sprite phase items are accumulated into `SpriteBatch` components on the first entity of each batch, containing a range of vertex indices. The associated `PhaseItem`'s `batch_size` is updated appropriately. - `SpriteBatch` items are then drawn skipping over the other items in the batch based on the value in `batch_size` - A very similar refactor was performed on `bevy_ui` --- ## Changelog Changed: - Reordered and reworked render app schedule sets. The main change is that data is extracted, queued, sorted, and then prepared when the order of data is known. - Refactor `bevy_sprite` and `bevy_ui` to take advantage of the reordering. ## Migration Guide - Assets such as materials and meshes should now be created in `PrepareAssets` e.g. `prepare_assets<Mesh>` - Queueing entities to `RenderPhase`s continues to be done in `Queue` e.g. `queue_sprites` - Preparing resources (textures, buffers, etc.) should now be done in `PrepareResources`, e.g. `prepare_prepass_textures`, `prepare_mesh_uniforms` - Prepare bind groups should now be done in `PrepareBindGroups` e.g. `prepare_mesh_bind_group` - Any batching or instancing can now be done in `Prepare` where the order of the phase items is known e.g. `prepare_sprites` ## Next Steps - Introduce some generic mechanism to ensure items that can be batched are grouped in the phase item order, currently you could easily have `[sprite at z 0, mesh at z 0, sprite at z 0]` preventing batching. - Investigate improved orderings for building the MeshUniform buffer - Implementing batching across the rest of bevy --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Swain <robert.swain@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: robtfm <50659922+robtfm@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
Robert Swain
|
e6405bb7b4
|
Use GpuArrayBuffer for MeshUniform (#9254)
# Objective
- Reduce the number of rebindings to enable batching of draw commands
## Solution
- Use the new `GpuArrayBuffer` for `MeshUniform` data to store all
`MeshUniform` data in arrays within fewer bindings
- Sort opaque/alpha mask prepass, opaque/alpha mask main, and shadow
phases also by the batch per-object data binding dynamic offset to
improve performance on WebGL2.
---
## Changelog
- Changed: Per-object `MeshUniform` data is now managed by
`GpuArrayBuffer` as arrays in buffers that need to be indexed into.
## Migration Guide
Accessing the `model` member of an individual mesh object's shader
`Mesh` struct the old way where each `MeshUniform` was stored at its own
dynamic offset:
```rust
struct Vertex {
@location(0) position: vec3<f32>,
};
fn vertex(vertex: Vertex) -> VertexOutput {
var out: VertexOutput;
out.clip_position = mesh_position_local_to_clip(
mesh.model,
vec4<f32>(vertex.position, 1.0)
);
return out;
}
```
The new way where one needs to index into the array of `Mesh`es for the
batch:
```rust
struct Vertex {
@builtin(instance_index) instance_index: u32,
@location(0) position: vec3<f32>,
};
fn vertex(vertex: Vertex) -> VertexOutput {
var out: VertexOutput;
out.clip_position = mesh_position_local_to_clip(
mesh[vertex.instance_index].model,
vec4<f32>(vertex.position, 1.0)
);
return out;
}
```
Note that using the instance_index is the default way to pass the
per-object index into the shader, but if you wish to do custom rendering
approaches you can pass it in however you like.
---------
Co-authored-by: robtfm <50659922+robtfm@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Elabajaba <Elabajaba@users.noreply.github.com>
|
||
|
JMS55
|
ad011d0455
|
Add GpuArrayBuffer and BatchedUniformBuffer (#8204)
# Objective - Add a type for uploading a Rust `Vec<T>` to a GPU `array<T>`. - Makes progress towards https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/89. ## Solution - Port @superdump's `BatchedUniformBuffer` to bevy main, as a fallback for WebGL2, which doesn't support storage buffers. - Rather than getting an `array<T>` in a shader, you get an `array<T, N>`, and have to rebind every N elements via dynamic offsets. - Add `GpuArrayBuffer` to abstract over `StorageBuffer<Vec<T>>`/`BatchedUniformBuffer`. ## Future Work Add a shader macro kinda thing to abstract over the following automatically: https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/8204#pullrequestreview-1396911727 --- ## Changelog * Added `GpuArrayBuffer`, `GpuComponentArrayBufferPlugin`, `GpuArrayBufferable`, and `GpuArrayBufferIndex` types. * Added `DynamicUniformBuffer::new_with_alignment()`. --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Swain <robert.swain@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: François <mockersf@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Teodor Tanasoaia <28601907+teoxoy@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: IceSentry <IceSentry@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Vincent <9408210+konsolas@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: robtfm <50659922+robtfm@users.noreply.github.com> |