Object Info node can be useful to give some variation to a single material assigned to multiple instances. This patch adds support for Viewport and BI.
{F499530}
Example: {F499528}
Reviewers: merwin, brecht, dfelinto
Reviewed By: brecht
Subscribers: duarteframos, fclem, homyachetser, Evgeny_Rodygin, AlexKowel, yurikovelenov
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D2425
The absence of datablock properties "will certainly be resolved soon as the need for them is becoming obvious" said the [[http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Ref/Release_Notes/2.67/Python_Nodes|Python Nodes release notes]]. So this patch allows Python scripts to create ID Properties which reference datablocks.
This functionality is implemented for `PointerProperty` and now such properties can be created with Python.
In addition to the standard update callback, `PointerProperty` can have a `poll` callback (standard RNA) which is useful for search menus. For details see the test included in this patch.
Original author: @artfunkel
Alexander (Blend4Web Team)
Reviewers: brecht, artfunkel, mont29, campbellbarton
Reviewed By: mont29, campbellbarton
Subscribers: jta, sergey, campbellbarton, wisaac, poseidon4o, mont29, homyachetser, Evgeny_Rodygin, AlexKowel, yurikovelenov, fjuhec, sharlybg, cardboard, duarteframos, blueprintrandom, a.romanov, BYOB, disnel, aditiapratama, bliblubli, dfelinto, lukastoenne
Maniphest Tasks: T37754
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D113
This adds the ability to switch between different application-configurations
without interfering with Blender's normal operation.
This commit doesn't include any templates,
so its mostly to allow collaboration for the Blender 101 project
and other custom configurations.
Application templates can be installed & selected from the file menu.
Other details:
- The `bl_app_template_utils` module handles template activation
(similar to `addon_utils`).
- The `bl_app_override` module is a general module
to assist scripts overriding parts of Blender in reversible way.
See docs:
https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/dev/advanced/app_templates.html
See patch: D2565
Ideally we need to find a way to remove such a static limit here, but it's not so
trivial to implement for texture nodes. Requires some bigger system redesign there.
Just raising limit for now, which is fine for modern systems.
This removes the goal springs, in favor of simply calculating the goal forces on the vertices directly. The vertices already store all the necessary data for the goal forces, thus the springs were redundant, and just defined both ends as being the same vertex.
The main advantage of removing the goal springs, is an increase in flexibility, allowing us to much more nicely do some neat dynamic stuff with the goals/pins, such as animated vertex weights. But this also has the advantage of simpler code, and a slightly reduced memory footprint.
This also removes the `f`, `dfdx` and `dfdv` fields from the `ClothSpring` struct, as that data is only used by the solver, and is re-computed on each step, and thus does not need to be stored throughout the simulation.
Reviewers: sergey
Reviewed By: sergey
Tags: #physics
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D2514
Internal change needed for template support.
Loading the user preferences first so it's possible
for preferences to control startup behavior.
In general it's useful to load preferences before data-files,
so we know security settings for eg.
The thing i'm really starting to hate is the requirement to specify both
operation code and node type. Seems to be duplicated enums without real
need for that.
Was using some threaded queue on top of task pool, tssk...
Now using properly task pool directly to crunch chunks of smooth fans.
No noticable changes in speed.
Tried to completely get rid of the 'no threading with few loops' code,
but even just creating/freeing the task pool, without actually pushing
any task, is enough to make code 50% slower in worst case scenario (i.e.
few thousands of simple cube objects).
The root of the issue was in custom normal code, so far it assumed that
we could only have one cyclic smooth fan around each vertex, which is...
blatantly wrong (again, the two cones sharing same vertex tip e.g.).
This required a rather deep change in how smooth fans/clnor spaces are processed,
took me some time to find a 'good' solution.
Note that new code is slightly slower than previous one (maybe about 5%),
not much to be done here, am afraid.
Tested against all older report files I could find, seems OK.
This feature was adding extra complexity to task scheduling
which required yet extra variables to be worried about to be
modified in atomic manner, which resulted in following issues:
- More complex code to maintain, which increases risks of
something going wrong when we modify the code.
- Extra barriers and/or locks during task scheduling, which
causes extra threading overhead.
- Unable to use some other implementation (such as TBB) even for
the comparison tests.
Notes about other changes.
There are two places where we really had to use that limit.
One of them is the single threaded dependency graph. This will
now construct a single-threaded scheduler at evaluation time.
This shouldn't be a problem because it only happens when using
debugging command line arguments and the code simply don't
run in regular Blender operation.
The code seems a bit duplicated here across old and new
depsgraph, but think it's OK since the old depsgraph is already
gone in 2.8 branch and i don't see where else we might want
to use such a single-threaded scheduler.
When/if we'll want to do so, we can move it to a centralized
single-threaded scheduler in threads.c.
OpenGL render was a bit more tricky to port, but basically we
are using conditional variables to wait background thread to
do all the job.
Can't say enough how much I hate those proxies... their duality (sharing
some aspects of both direct *and* indirect users) is a nightmare to handle. :(
Not really happy of per-pool threads limit, need to find better
approach to that. But at least it's possible to get rid of half
of the nastyness here by removing getter which was only used in
an assert statement.
That piece of code was already well-tested and this code becomes
obsolete in the new depsgraph and does no longer exists in blender
2.8 branch.
This adds an option to force fields of type "Force", which enables the
simulation of gravitational behavior (dist^-2 falloff).
Patch by @AndreasE
Reviewers: #physics, LucaRood, mont29
Reviewed By: #physics, LucaRood, mont29
Tags: #physics
Differential Revision: https://developer.blender.org/D2389
So... Curve+shapekey was even more broken than it looked, this report was
actually a nice crasher (immediate crash in an ASAN build when trying to
edit a curve shapekey with some viewport rendering enabled).
There were actually two different issues here.
I) The less critical: rB6f1493f68fe was not fully fixing issues from
T50614. More specifically, if you updated obdata from editnurb
*without* freeing editnurb afterwards, you had a 'restored' (to
original curve) editnurb, without the edited shapekey modifications
anymore. This was fixed by tweaking again `calc_shapeKeys()` behavior in
`ED_curve_editnurb_load()`.
II) The crasher: in `ED_curve_editnurb_make()`, the call to
`init_editNurb_keyIndex()` was directly storing pointers of obdata
nurbs. Since those get freed every time `ED_curve_editnurb_load()` is
executed, it easily ended up being pointers to freed memory. This was
fixed by copying those data, which implied more complex handling code
for editnurbs->keyindex, and some reshuffling of a few functions to
avoid duplicating things between editor's editcurve.c and BKE's curve.c
Note that the separation of functions between editors and BKE area for
curve could use a serious update, it's currently messy to say the least.
Then again, that area is due to rework since a long time now... :/
Finally, aligned 'for_render' curve evaluation to mesh one - now
editing a shapekey will show in rendered viewports, if it does have some
weight (exactly as with shapekeys of meshes).
New logic of split_faces was leaving mesh in a proper state
from Blender's point of view, but Cycles wanted loop normals
to be "flushed" to vertex normals.
Now we do such a flush from Cycles side again, so we don't
leave bad meshes behind.
Thanks Bastien for assistance here!
