shadow module UBO

[felixpalmer]

For #8997

Change List

• Add UBOs for shadow module
• Remove residual UniformTypes instances

[ibgreen]

If we can't sort the layer.ts dependency creep here, let's add it to our adit log for later discussion. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rBkxgYd5vTKjDC9AHEd3jbrhZgtbQH6TYxaBOgqIDGI/edit

[ibgreen]

Concern:

• That is a lot of individual imports, kind of pollutes to have such a big surface area from a leaf functionality into a core file.
• Same for terrain I suppose though I didn't catch it then.
• Is there a way things can be made more decoupled or pluggable. Some function to get the props, instead of requiring layer class to be aware of them all?

[felixpalmer]

Agree, I have a TODO to review it once the UBO migration is complete. I chose to do it here as this is where setModuleParameters is being invoked in the same way.

Some of the other modules are already self-contained, like the MaskExtension, so I expect we will be able to tidy this up. First though I would like to remove all the updateModuleSettings calls before potentially changing the data flow in the code.

I have added this point to the Audit Log as suggested

[ibgreen]

Just a personal preference nit: This <module>/shader-module.ts naming scheme leaves us with a lot of files with the same name. I find that confusing when searching. Would recommend calling this mask-shader-module.ts or something more unique.

[felixpalmer]

No strong opinions here, but for me the fuzzy searching works for the whole path

[ibgreen]

First: I am not worried about this, leaving it is fine.

That said (bikeshed mode on):

• I looked and was happy to see that the other files in the directory have the name of the extension (mask-) in their name. So why not this file too?
• Seems like two different naming philosophies are in play at the same time?
• At least the naming scheme seems consistent the various new extensions...

[felixpalmer]

While we're bikeshedding, for whatever reason the shader-module files have an anonymous default export whereas the others do not:

class MaskPass extends LayersPass;
class MaskExtension extends LayerExtension;
class MaskEffect implements Effect;

There is a pattern here, where the full superclass is not used for brevity (e.g. we don't have MaskLayersPass). So I would argue if we want to rename the files it would be best to go with MaskModule and then src/mask/mask-module.ts

[ibgreen]

have an anonymous default export whereas the others do not:

Yes, I have virtually removed all default exports from the internals of the other visgl libraries, as default export are less safe, less compatible than named exports. It would be great to see deck go in the same direction.

So I would argue if we want to rename the files it would be best to go with MaskModule and then src/mask/mask-module.ts

So we do need a name.

• In luma.gl the shader modules are named with lower case and no suffix: picking, project32 etc.
• That naming convention is rather presumptive ("we think shader modules are so important that their names don't need any qualifications").
• Calling it mask would follow luma conventions, but would be a bit "stark" here?
• Calling it maskModule would be somewhere in-between, perhaps the most reasonable compromise?
• Calling it MaskModule additionally has the problem that I usually use PascalCase symbols for types, not objects.

[coveralls]

coverage: 89.314% (+0.05%) from 89.261%
when pulling c51204d on felix/shadow-ubo
into 484419d on master.