-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
Remove SimpleExecutor
#18741
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
Open
ElliottjPierce
wants to merge
4
commits into
bevyengine:main
Choose a base branch
from
ElliottjPierce:remove-simple-system-executor
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+18
−243
Open
Remove SimpleExecutor
#18741
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file was deleted.
Oops, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions
15
release-content/migration-guides/removed_simple_executor.md
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ | ||
--- | ||
title: Removed Simple Executor | ||
pull_requests: [18741] | ||
--- | ||
|
||
Bevy has removed `SimpleExecutor`, one of the `SystemExecutor`s in Bevy alongside `SingleThreadedExecutor` and `MultiThreadedExecutor` (which aren't going anywhere any time soon). | ||
The `MultiThreadedExecutor` is great at large schedules and async heavy work, and the `SingleThreadedExecutor` is good at smaller schedules or schedules that have fewer parallelizable systems. | ||
So what was `SimpleExecutor` good at? Not much. That's why it was removed. Removing it reduced some maintenance and consistency burdons on maintainers, allowing them to focus on more exciting features! | ||
|
||
If you were using `SimpleExecutor`, consider upgrading to `SingleThreadedExecutor` instead, or try `MultiThreadedExecutor` if if fits the schedule. | ||
It's worth mentioning that `SimpleExecutor` ran deferred commands inbetween *each* system, regardless of it it was needed. | ||
The other executors are more efficient about this, but that means they need extra information about when to run those commands. | ||
In most schedules, that information comes from the contents and ordering of systems, via `before`, `after`, `chain`, etc. | ||
If a schedule that was previously using `SimpleExecutor` still needs commands from one system to be applied before another system runs, | ||
make sure that ordering is enforced explicitly by these methods, rather than implicitly by the order of `add_systems`. |
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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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 migration guide seems to be duplicate now, see
simple_executor_going_away.md
, which is about the deprecation of the executorThere 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.
Yeah, it should be one or the other.
Do we want to remove it for 0.17 or just deprecate? If just deprecate, we should save this for 0.18. Otherwise, I'll update this pr and remove the old migration guide.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Deprecating feels like a nicer migration experience :)
That way users can ask for help while upgrading without their app being broken until they made the switch to another executor
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
@alice-i-cecile could we get a 0.18 milestone? Or do we just not merge this until 0.17 is released?
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.
Sounds good. I'll let this go cold and we can come back to it later.