-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21.4k
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
GPU/CPU particle parameter list consistency changes #95132
GPU/CPU particle parameter list consistency changes #95132
Conversation
…nt accross all particle types
…s for compatibility.
Hi everyone, is there any way to progress this PR getting reviewed and merged? |
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.
Looks good to me overall.
My only concern is with moving process_material
at the end of an already long list of settings. I guess that's how it is in 3D but I always found it's hard to find even though it's such an important (the most important probably) property for GPU particles.
BTW while we wait for a second review, could you squash the commits? See PR workflow for instructions. |
I see in the original PR comment you list a change of default for draw order, but I cannot see it in the PR. I don't think we should change it. |
Resolved above in a review comment |
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.
LGTM. There could be people complaining that the order will be confusing but I guess it makes sense to make them consistent.
Regarding loosing the overview: Wasn't there a proposal/discussion to have a default ParticleProcessMaterial
when adding a GPU/CPU Particles Node to the SceneTree?
Thanks! |
This draft PR introduces changes to the listing of parameters for the GPU and CPU particles 2D to be more consistent with their 3D counterparts as a minor quality of life improvement, as requested in #94687
The inconsistencies I noticed that have been addressed are:
On gpu_particles_2d:
And on cpu_particles_2d:
The changes should address these inconsistencies.