Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Proposal for new architecture for UnityGLTF library #259
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Proposal for new architecture for UnityGLTF library #259
Changes from 5 commits
152ffe4
f94c80e
5cd205d
c068452
57f547b
7aa3e51
2321bfc
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The whole UnityGLTFObject stateful wrapper still seems like a confusing part of this design to me. I think I'm now leaning more towards just passing in the raw deserialized data structure for the gltf root, and additionally (optionally) passing in an AssetCache by ref. Any problems with that approach?
Also, if we went that route, it would be very natural to have an ImportSceneAsync extension method that takes a path instead of a gltf root object, and incorporate async deserialization there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It doesn't enforce that asset caches and paired to a glTF object. It's just decoupling the two rather than having them stored in an object. I should update the design to have UnityGLTFObject expose the AssetCache.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need this paramterless constructor?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The default constructor is used for when there are no options that are being set
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not just pass in null if you don't want to set options? It seems weird that the options are to either provide extensions and options, or nothing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
interface, not class
Also wondering about the name of this interface... I wonder if something like IResourceLocator would be more self explanatory? Not sure...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's not really locating resources. It's only resolving them to a stream.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How about
Uri uri
instead ofstring uri
. Just require at the contract level that a valid Uri is passed in.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Because it's not necessarily a web uri, which seems to be what the uri class is built around. Maybe path is a better parameter name?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The URI documentation says that it supports the
file://
protocol, which in turn supports relative URIs. Seems like that would be enough.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does it not make more sense for this to just be a parameter of the actual Export* method(s)? Is it not possible to have a single exporter instance that exports both gltf and glb?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need the Importer passed in here? Is it to allow the method to call the default load logic for a scene or something? If so, we should probably pass in an interface with the intended subset of the functionality. Otherwise, it is confusing how you are supposed to use this from the context of an extension (unless it is really expected that you might call any method on the importer from this context). Alternatively, we could restrict this further to only having the ability to invoke the base functionality for the type in question (e.g. from this context, you could call just one method for default scene loading, and in CreateNodeAsync you could call just one method for default node loading, etc.).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps this layer of intention could be implemented as an IExtensionContext interface instance passed into the function, where Importer implements IExtensionContext?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This mirrors the functionality of Babylon. An extension may want to call any of the functions on the loader. I suppose there is a limit to what extension could want to do (an image load is not going to probably edit the animation hierarchy). I'm not sure how an interface would look different than the internal loader functions.
One thought is that the
Importer
interface is publicly created and there is anImporterImpl
which is not able to be publicly constructed but all methods are publicly accessibleThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is the UnityGLTFObject passed in here? Is it so the extension can basically cache data in it? If so, then I guess this implies that the UnityGLTFObject is not opaque from the standpoint of the consumer of this API?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes that UnityGLTFObject has the cache of data inside which may be needed for the extension
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pass the CancellationToken to the gltf extension methods as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No longer valid, correct?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this assuming that deserialization is synchronous? Seems like this would naturally lead people down a bad path.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, this is just passing in a uri that will be resolved during the actual load