3.x draft (for ci check only)

[halx99]

Describe your changes

• Remove all deprecated stubs
• Implement drawArraysInstanced and make instanced draw more common use
• box2d-3.x
  • Make Box2dTest of cpp-tests works on box2d v3
  • Make Box2dTestBed of cpp-tests works on box2d v3
• Remove chipmunk
  • Remove core/physics based on chipmunk
  • Remove ChipmunkTest from cpp-tests
  • Remove ChipmuniTestbed from cpp-tests
• Change underlaying color type to Color4F aka ax::Color
• Improve DrawNode, don't create backend::Buffer always
• Reimplement core/physics with box2d v3, not all API compatible with axmol-2.x

Issue ticket number and link

Checklist before requesting a review

For each PR

• Add Copyright if it missed:
  - "Copyright (c) 2019-present Axmol Engine contributors (see AUTHORS.md)."

• I have performed a self-review of my code.

  Optional:

  • I have checked readme and add important infos to this PR.
  • I have added/adapted some tests too.

For core/new feature PR

• I have checked readme and add important infos to this PR.
• I have added thorough tests.

[smilediver]

From outside it would be easier to track changes being made to 3.x branch if they all went through PRs like in the dev branch. They would also get CI check automatically, and there would be an opportunity for reviews and comments.

[halx99]

currently, 3.x is a draft branch or you can consider it is a temp branch, I don't like make PR one by one to waste much time. I create this PR is only for non-win32 platform ci-check, because I'm compile and test on my windows computer.

[aismann]

Physics should be an own test project like fairgui.
@halx99
What are you mean?

[halx99]

Physics should be an own test project like fairgui. @halx99 What are you mean?

I think physics test in cpp-tests is ok

[aismann]

@halx99
Please have a look on the Performance Candy Mix test:

• drawOrder: true it very slow (2.2 is faster) and closing get this:

Assertion failed!
Program: ..._GIT\axmol\build\bin\cpp-tests\Debug\cpp-tests.exe
File: D:__GIT\axmol\core\renderer\CustomCommand.cpp
Line: 221
Expression: _vertexBuffer

I getting this also on other tests when I switched drawOrder: to 'true'

[halx99]

@halx99 Please have a look on the Performance Candy Mix test:

• drawOrder: true it very slow (2.2 is faster) and closing get this:

Assertion failed!

Program: ..._GIT\axmol\build\bin\cpp-tests\Debug\cpp-tests.exe File: D:__GIT\axmol\core\renderer\CustomCommand.cpp Line: 221

Expression: _vertexBuffer

Tested, works well, and no assertion

[aismann]

Click on this text plz: it switched the drawOrder

It raised if you switched back to false

here another example:

[halx99]

Click on this text plz: it switched the drawOrder It raised if you switched back to false

here another example:

Assertion failed was fixed.

[aismann]

Yeah. Works now.
Please have a look on the release comparing between 2.2/3.0 on Performance Candy Mix test again:
2.2 release version drawNode true:
Seems faster (on my machine >50 FPS always)

3.0 release version drawNode true:

And the drawing looks very bad like pixel jumps around whatever on Performance Candy Mix

[halx99]

On my machine, release build, both 2.2 & 3.0 is 60fps

[aismann]

On my machine, release build, both 2.2 & 3.0 is 60fps

Your machine is faster. You cant see this behavior.
What about the crazy drawing ? Looks it the same candy?

You have switch the drawOrder =>true (on the both release biulds)?

[halx99]

I also saw the crazy drawing

[aismann]

On my machine, release build, both 2.2 & 3.0 is 60fps

You have switch the drawOrder =>true (on the both release biulds)?

[halx99]

the ax::Color same with Color4F must be normalized

[aismann]

the ax::Color same with Color4F must be normalized

normalized What das this means?
ax::Color4F(1.0, 0, 0, 0.5) is also no alpha working

[halx99]

The ax::Color is just renamed from ax::Color4F, I don't understand what do mean no alpha working

[aismann]

@halx99
I checked it again. It works correct. Sorry.
I used ax:Color like ax::Color4B not like ax::Color4F

An assert >1.0f is useful?

[aismann]

I installed axmol on a new machine.
Compiling the 3.0 branch..
Starting the Box2D Testbed and ..boom....

Folder axmol\build\bin\cpp-tests\Debug\axslc\custom has no files:

 custom/circle_vs
 custom/circle_fs

[rh101]

I installed axmol on a new machine.
Compiling the 3.0 branch..
Starting the Box2D Testbed and ..boom....

Given that this is a work in progress, it may be a little premature to be attempting to make use of it for any reason. Perhaps wait till it is out of draft and ready for testing.

[halx99]

I already add .fs .vs as glslcc shader file extension: https://github.com/axmolengine/axmol/blob/3.x/cmake/Modules/AXGLSLCC.cmake#L12

so I don't know why you meet the issue, maybe delete build folder, then re-cmake will fix your issue

[aismann]

so I don't know why you meet the issue, maybe delete build folder, then re-cmake will fix your issue

Works now: I download and rebuild axmol again.

[aismann]

[...] Perhaps wait till it is out of draft and ready for testing.

@rh101
You are right for Box2D 3.x stuff.
But this is all done and working for nativ using of Box2D 3.x
=> See the working Box2D tests on cpp-tests.
All other changes be more like PRs which we doing allways.
And of course this are also working well.

The only alpha status will be the internal physics, but this is not using be me at the moment.

Thats my opinium.

Edit:
Last but not least:
Testing this PR in an early state (parts which should work of course, not the alpha part!) permit/detect side effects earlier and can reduce time for the developer, because he needs not so much testing this parts. Of course mistakes done by the 'tester' can be raising too (thats the bad side).

[aismann]

@halx99
Please rename also all:
V2F_C4F_T2F_Triangle to V2F_T2F_C4F_Triangle
V3F_C4F_T2F_Quad to V3F_T2F_C4F_Quad
V2F_C4F_T2F_Quad to V2F_T2F_C4F_Quad

[smilediver]

Why was vertex color changed from bytes to floats? This increases vertex size from 24 bytes to 36 by a 50%! Which will increase memory usage and traffic for no gain and at a performance cost, especially on mobile devices.