| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
MSVC used to warn about const mismatch for arguments passed by value.
Remove these as newer versions of MSVC no longer show this warning.
|
|
This adds `blender::is_same_any_v` which is the almost the same as
`std::is_same_v`. The difference is that it allows for checking multiple
types at the same time.
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D13673
|
|
Previously we used a `CellValue` class to hold the data for a cell,
and called a function to fill it whenever necessary. This is an
unnecessary complication when we have virtual generic arrays
and most data is already easily accessible that way anyway.
This patch removes `CellValue` and uses `fn::GVArray` to provide
access to data instead.
In the future, if rows have different types within a single column,
we can use a `GVArray` of `blender::Any` to interface with the drawing.
Along with that, the use of virtual arrays made it easy to do a
few other cleanups:
- Use selection domain interpolations from rB5841f8656d95
for the mesh selection filter.
- Change the row filter to only calculate for necessary indices.
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D13478
|
|
Ref T92709
|
|
For some underlying data (e.g. spans) we had two virtual array
implementations. One for the mutable and one for the immutable
case. Now that most code does not deal with the virtual array
implementations directly anymore (since rBrBd4c868da9f97a),
we can get away with sharing one implementation for both cases.
This means that we have to do a `const_cast` in a few places, but
this is an implementation detail that does not leak into "user code"
(only when explicitly casting a `VArrayImpl` to a `VMutableArrayImpl`,
which should happen nowhere).
|
|
Use 'template' keyword to treat 'is' as a dependent template name
|
|
Goals of this refactor:
* Simplify creating virtual arrays.
* Simplify passing virtual arrays around.
* Simplify converting between typed and generic virtual arrays.
* Reduce memory allocations.
As a quick reminder, a virtual arrays is a data structure that behaves like an
array (i.e. it can be accessed using an index). However, it may not actually
be stored as array internally. The two most important implementations
of virtual arrays are those that correspond to an actual plain array and those
that have the same value for every index. However, many more
implementations exist for various reasons (interfacing with legacy attributes,
unified iterator over all points in multiple splines, ...).
With this refactor the core types (`VArray`, `GVArray`, `VMutableArray` and
`GVMutableArray`) can be used like "normal values". They typically live
on the stack. Before, they were usually inside a `std::unique_ptr`. This makes
passing them around much easier. Creation of new virtual arrays is also
much simpler now due to some constructors. Memory allocations are
reduced by making use of small object optimization inside the core types.
Previously, `VArray` was a class with virtual methods that had to be overridden
to change the behavior of a the virtual array. Now,`VArray` has a fixed size
and has no virtual methods. Instead it contains a `VArrayImpl` that is
similar to the old `VArray`. `VArrayImpl` should rarely ever be used directly,
unless a new virtual array implementation is added.
To support the small object optimization for many `VArrayImpl` classes,
a new `blender::Any` type is added. It is similar to `std::any` with two
additional features. It has an adjustable inline buffer size and alignment.
The inline buffer size of `std::any` can't be relied on and is usually too
small for our use case here. Furthermore, `blender::Any` can store
additional user-defined type information without increasing the
stack size.
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D12986
|
|
Sometimes it's useful to pass around a set of values with a generic
type. The virtual array data structures allow this, but they don't
have logical ownership. My initial use case for this is as a return
type for the functions that interpolate curve attributes to evaluated
points, but a need for this data structure has come up in a few other
places as well. It also reduced the need for templates.
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D11103
|
|
This adds a new `ParallelMultiFunction` which wraps another multi-function
and evaluates it with multiple threads. The speeds up field evaluation
quite a bit (the effect is most noticeable when the number of evaluations
and the field is large).
There are still other single-threaded performance bottlenecks in field
evaluation that will need to be solved separately. Most notably here
is the process of copying the computed data into the position attribute
in the Set Position node.
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D12457
|
|
The multi-function network system was able to compose multiple
multi-functions into a new one and to evaluate that efficiently.
This functionality was heavily used by the particle nodes prototype
a year ago. However, since then we only used multi-functions
without the need to compose them in geometry nodes.
The upcoming "fields" in geometry nodes will need a way to
compose multi-functions again. Unfortunately, the code removed
in this commit was not ideal for this different kind of function
composition. I've been working on an alternative that will be added
separately when it becomes needed.
I've had to update all the function nodes, because their interface
depended on the multi-function network data structure a bit.
The actual multi-function implementations are still the same though.
|
|
|
|
* Reduce code duplication.
* Give methods more standardized names (e.g. `move_to_initialized` -> `move_assign`).
* Support wrapping arbitrary C++ types, even those that e.g. are not copyable.
|
|
|
|
This fixes a bad mistake by myself. Thanks Lukas Tönne for telling me.
|
|
macOS Clang
|
|
|
|
Part of a rename change in rBc5d38a2be8 was lost when committing.
|
|
This is very similar to rB5613c61275fe6 and rB0061150e4c90d, basically
just exposing a `VMutableArray` method to its generic counterpart. This
is quite important for curve point attributes to avoid a lookup for
every point when there are multiple splines.
|
|
Similar to how `GVArray_For_VArray` implements `materialize_impl` to
forward the work to its non-generic virtual array, we can do the same
thing for the mutable version, `GVMutableArray_For_VMutableArray`.
This commit should have no visible changes, since as far as I can tell
the only user of this class does not implement special materialize
methods anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Creating a shallow copy is sometimes useful to get a unique ptr
for a virtual array when one only has a reference. It shouldn't
be used usually, but sometimes its the fastest way to do correct
ownership handling.
|
|
Sometimes functions expect a span instead of a virtual array.
If the virtual array is a span internally already, great. But if it is
not (e.g. the position attribute on a mesh), the elements have
to be copied over to a span.
This patch makes the copying process more efficient by giving
the compiler more opportunity for optimization.
|
|
A virtual array is a data structure that is similar to a normal array
in that its elements can be accessed by an index. However, a virtual
array does not have to be a contiguous array internally. Instead, its
elements can be layed out arbitrarily while element access happens
through a virtual function call. However, the virtual array data
structures are designed so that the virtual function call can be avoided
in cases where it could become a bottleneck.
Most commonly, a virtual array is backed by an actual array/span or
is a single value internally, that is the same for every index.
Besides those, there are many more specialized virtual arrays like the
ones that provides vertex positions based on the `MVert` struct or
vertex group weights.
Not all attributes used by geometry nodes are stored in simple contiguous
arrays. To provide uniform access to all kinds of attributes, the attribute
API has to provide virtual array functionality that hides the implementation
details of attributes.
Before this refactor, the attribute API provided its own virtual array
implementation as part of the `ReadAttribute` and `WriteAttribute` types.
That resulted in unnecessary code duplication with the virtual array system.
Even worse, it bound many algorithms used by geometry nodes to the specifics
of the attribute API, even though they could also use different data sources
(such as data from sockets, default values, later results of expressions, ...).
This refactor removes the `ReadAttribute` and `WriteAttribute` types and
replaces them with `GVArray` and `GVMutableArray` respectively. The `GV`
stands for "generic virtual". The "generic" means that the data type contained
in those virtual arrays is only known at run-time. There are the corresponding
statically typed types `VArray<T>` and `VMutableArray<T>` as well.
No regressions are expected from this refactor. It does come with one
improvement for users. The attribute API can convert the data type
on write now. This is especially useful when writing to builtin attributes
like `material_index` with e.g. the Attribute Math node (which usually
just writes to float attributes, while `material_index` is an integer attribute).
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D10994
|
|
This adds support for mutable virtual arrays and provides many utilities
for creating virtual arrays for various kinds of data. This commit is
preparation for D10994.
|
|
|
|
|
|
When a function is executed for many elements (e.g. per point) it is often the case
that some parameters are different for every element and other parameters are
the same (there are some more less common cases). To simplify writing such
functions one can use a "virtual array". This is a data structure that has a value
for every index, but might not be stored as an actual array internally. Instead, it
might be just a single value or is computed on the fly. There are various tradeoffs
involved when using this data structure which are mentioned in `BLI_virtual_array.hh`.
It is called "virtual", because it uses inheritance and virtual methods.
Furthermore, there is a new virtual vector array data structure, which is an array
of vectors. Both these types have corresponding generic variants, which can be used
when the data type is not known at compile time. This is typically the case when
building a somewhat generic execution system. The function system used these virtual
data structures before, but now they are more versatile.
I've done this refactor in preparation for the attribute processor and other features of
geometry nodes. I moved the typed virtual arrays to blenlib, so that they can be used
independent of the function system.
One open question for me is whether all the generic data structures (and `CPPType`)
should be moved to blenlib as well. They are well isolated and don't really contain
any business logic. That can be done later if necessary.
|
