Fix asset loader registration warning #11870
Merged
Conversation
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
ghost
added
the
A-Diagnostics
ghost
suggested changes
Feb 15, 2024
ghost
approved these changes
Feb 15, 2024
bushrat011899
approved these changes
Feb 15, 2024
mockersf
added
the
A-Assets
alice-i-cecile
added
the
S-Ready-For-Final-Review
arunke
added a commit
to arunke/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 2, 2025
# Objective The original fix (bevyengine#11870) did not actually implement the described logic. It checked if there were independently multiple loaders for a given asset type and multiple loaders for a given extension. However, this did not handle the case where those loaders were not the same. For example, there could be a loader for type `Foo` and extension `.foo`. Anther loader could exist for type `Bar` but extension `.bar`. If a third loader was added for type `Foo` but extension `.bar`, the warning would have been incorrectly logged. ## Solution Instead of independently checking to see if there are preexisting loaders for both the extension and type, look up the indices of the loaders for the type in question. Then check to see if the loaders registered for the extensions has any overlap. Only log if there are loaders that fit this criteria.
arunke
added a commit
to arunke/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 2, 2025
The original fix (bevyengine#11870) did not actually implement the described logic. It checked if there were independently multiple loaders for a given asset type and multiple loaders for a given extension. However, this did not handle the case where those loaders were not the same. For example, there could be a loader for type `Foo` and extension `.foo`. Anther loader could exist for type `Bar` but extension `.bar`. If a third loader was added for type `Foo` but extension `.bar`, the warning would have been incorrectly logged. Instead of independently checking to see if there are preexisting loaders for both the extension and type, look up the indices of the loaders for the type in question. Then check to see if the loaders registered for the extensions has any overlap. Only log if there are loaders that fit this criteria.
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 6, 2025
# Objective The original fix (#11870) did not actually implement the described logic. It checked if there were independently multiple loaders for a given asset type and multiple loaders for a given extension. However, this did not handle the case where those loaders were not the same. For example, there could be a loader for type `Foo` and extension `.foo`. Anther loader could exist for type `Bar` but extension `.bar`. If a third loader was added for type `Foo` but extension `.bar`, the warning would have been incorrectly logged. ## Solution Instead of independently checking to see if there are preexisting loaders for both the extension and type, look up the indices of the loaders for the type in question. Then check to see if the loaders registered for the extensions has any overlap. Only log if there are loaders that fit this criteria. ## Testing Ran CI tests. Locally tested the situation describe in the objective section for the normal `App::init_asset_loader` flow. I think testing could be done on the pre-registration flow for loaders still. I tested on Windows, but the changes should not be affected by platform.
mrchantey
pushed a commit
to mrchantey/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 4, 2025
# Objective The original fix (bevyengine#11870) did not actually implement the described logic. It checked if there were independently multiple loaders for a given asset type and multiple loaders for a given extension. However, this did not handle the case where those loaders were not the same. For example, there could be a loader for type `Foo` and extension `.foo`. Anther loader could exist for type `Bar` but extension `.bar`. If a third loader was added for type `Foo` but extension `.bar`, the warning would have been incorrectly logged. ## Solution Instead of independently checking to see if there are preexisting loaders for both the extension and type, look up the indices of the loaders for the type in question. Then check to see if the loaders registered for the extensions has any overlap. Only log if there are loaders that fit this criteria. ## Testing Ran CI tests. Locally tested the situation describe in the objective section for the normal `App::init_asset_loader` flow. I think testing could be done on the pre-registration flow for loaders still. I tested on Windows, but the changes should not be affected by platform.
mockersf
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 6, 2025
# Objective The original fix (#11870) did not actually implement the described logic. It checked if there were independently multiple loaders for a given asset type and multiple loaders for a given extension. However, this did not handle the case where those loaders were not the same. For example, there could be a loader for type `Foo` and extension `.foo`. Anther loader could exist for type `Bar` but extension `.bar`. If a third loader was added for type `Foo` but extension `.bar`, the warning would have been incorrectly logged. ## Solution Instead of independently checking to see if there are preexisting loaders for both the extension and type, look up the indices of the loaders for the type in question. Then check to see if the loaders registered for the extensions has any overlap. Only log if there are loaders that fit this criteria. ## Testing Ran CI tests. Locally tested the situation describe in the objective section for the normal `App::init_asset_loader` flow. I think testing could be done on the pre-registration flow for loaders still. I tested on Windows, but the changes should not be affected by platform.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Objective
When registering and preregistering asset loaders, there would be a
warn!if multiple asset loaders use a given extension, and aninfo!if multiple asset loaders load the same asset type. Since both of these situations are individually fine, it was decided that these messages should be removed.Solution
Replace both of these messages with a new
warn!that notes that if multiple asset loaders share the same asset type and share extensions, that the loader must be specified in the.metafile for those assets in order to solve the ambiguity. This is a more useful message, since it notes when a user must take special action / consideration.