tornavis/source/blender/functions/FN_multi_function_params.hh

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

363 lines
13 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

/* SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023 Blender Authors
*
* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */
#pragma once
/** \file
* \ingroup fn
*
* This file provides an Params and ParamsBuilder structure.
*
* `ParamsBuilder` is used by a function caller to be prepare all parameters that are passed into
* the function. `Params` is then used inside the called function to access the parameters.
*/
#include <mutex>
#include <variant>
#include "BLI_generic_pointer.hh"
#include "BLI_generic_vector_array.hh"
#include "BLI_generic_virtual_vector_array.hh"
#include "BLI_resource_scope.hh"
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
#include "FN_multi_function_signature.hh"
namespace blender::fn::multi_function {
class ParamsBuilder {
private:
std::unique_ptr<ResourceScope> scope_;
const Signature *signature_;
BLI: refactor IndexMask for better performance and memory usage Goals of this refactor: * Reduce memory consumption of `IndexMask`. The old `IndexMask` uses an `int64_t` for each index which is more than necessary in pretty much all practical cases currently. Using `int32_t` might still become limiting in the future in case we use this to index e.g. byte buffers larger than a few gigabytes. We also don't want to template `IndexMask`, because that would cause a split in the "ecosystem", or everything would have to be implemented twice or templated. * Allow for more multi-threading. The old `IndexMask` contains a single array. This is generally good but has the problem that it is hard to fill from multiple-threads when the final size is not known from the beginning. This is commonly the case when e.g. converting an array of bool to an index mask. Currently, this kind of code only runs on a single thread. * Allow for efficient set operations like join, intersect and difference. It should be possible to multi-thread those operations. * It should be possible to iterate over an `IndexMask` very efficiently. The most important part of that is to avoid all memory access when iterating over continuous ranges. For some core nodes (e.g. math nodes), we generate optimized code for the cases of irregular index masks and simple index ranges. To achieve these goals, a few compromises had to made: * Slicing of the mask (at specific indices) and random element access is `O(log #indices)` now, but with a low constant factor. It should be possible to split a mask into n approximately equally sized parts in `O(n)` though, making the time per split `O(1)`. * Using range-based for loops does not work well when iterating over a nested data structure like the new `IndexMask`. Therefor, `foreach_*` functions with callbacks have to be used. To avoid extra code complexity at the call site, the `foreach_*` methods support multi-threading out of the box. The new data structure splits an `IndexMask` into an arbitrary number of ordered `IndexMaskSegment`. Each segment can contain at most `2^14 = 16384` indices. The indices within a segment are stored as `int16_t`. Each segment has an additional `int64_t` offset which allows storing arbitrary `int64_t` indices. This approach has the main benefits that segments can be processed/constructed individually on multiple threads without a serial bottleneck. Also it reduces the memory requirements significantly. For more details see comments in `BLI_index_mask.hh`. I did a few tests to verify that the data structure generally improves performance and does not cause regressions: * Our field evaluation benchmarks take about as much as before. This is to be expected because we already made sure that e.g. add node evaluation is vectorized. The important thing here is to check that changes to the way we iterate over the indices still allows for auto-vectorization. * Memory usage by a mask is about 1/4 of what it was before in the average case. That's mainly caused by the switch from `int64_t` to `int16_t` for indices. In the worst case, the memory requirements can be larger when there are many indices that are very far away. However, when they are far away from each other, that indicates that there aren't many indices in total. In common cases, memory usage can be way lower than 1/4 of before, because sub-ranges use static memory. * For some more specific numbers I benchmarked `IndexMask::from_bools` in `index_mask_from_selection` on 10.000.000 elements at various probabilities for `true` at every index: ``` Probability Old New 0 4.6 ms 0.8 ms 0.001 5.1 ms 1.3 ms 0.2 8.4 ms 1.8 ms 0.5 15.3 ms 3.0 ms 0.8 20.1 ms 3.0 ms 0.999 25.1 ms 1.7 ms 1 13.5 ms 1.1 ms ``` Pull Request: https://projects.blender.org/blender/blender/pulls/104629
2023-05-24 18:11:41 +02:00
const IndexMask &mask_;
int64_t min_array_size_;
Vector<std::variant<GVArray, GMutableSpan, const GVVectorArray *, GVectorArray *>>
actual_params_;
friend class Params;
BLI: refactor IndexMask for better performance and memory usage Goals of this refactor: * Reduce memory consumption of `IndexMask`. The old `IndexMask` uses an `int64_t` for each index which is more than necessary in pretty much all practical cases currently. Using `int32_t` might still become limiting in the future in case we use this to index e.g. byte buffers larger than a few gigabytes. We also don't want to template `IndexMask`, because that would cause a split in the "ecosystem", or everything would have to be implemented twice or templated. * Allow for more multi-threading. The old `IndexMask` contains a single array. This is generally good but has the problem that it is hard to fill from multiple-threads when the final size is not known from the beginning. This is commonly the case when e.g. converting an array of bool to an index mask. Currently, this kind of code only runs on a single thread. * Allow for efficient set operations like join, intersect and difference. It should be possible to multi-thread those operations. * It should be possible to iterate over an `IndexMask` very efficiently. The most important part of that is to avoid all memory access when iterating over continuous ranges. For some core nodes (e.g. math nodes), we generate optimized code for the cases of irregular index masks and simple index ranges. To achieve these goals, a few compromises had to made: * Slicing of the mask (at specific indices) and random element access is `O(log #indices)` now, but with a low constant factor. It should be possible to split a mask into n approximately equally sized parts in `O(n)` though, making the time per split `O(1)`. * Using range-based for loops does not work well when iterating over a nested data structure like the new `IndexMask`. Therefor, `foreach_*` functions with callbacks have to be used. To avoid extra code complexity at the call site, the `foreach_*` methods support multi-threading out of the box. The new data structure splits an `IndexMask` into an arbitrary number of ordered `IndexMaskSegment`. Each segment can contain at most `2^14 = 16384` indices. The indices within a segment are stored as `int16_t`. Each segment has an additional `int64_t` offset which allows storing arbitrary `int64_t` indices. This approach has the main benefits that segments can be processed/constructed individually on multiple threads without a serial bottleneck. Also it reduces the memory requirements significantly. For more details see comments in `BLI_index_mask.hh`. I did a few tests to verify that the data structure generally improves performance and does not cause regressions: * Our field evaluation benchmarks take about as much as before. This is to be expected because we already made sure that e.g. add node evaluation is vectorized. The important thing here is to check that changes to the way we iterate over the indices still allows for auto-vectorization. * Memory usage by a mask is about 1/4 of what it was before in the average case. That's mainly caused by the switch from `int64_t` to `int16_t` for indices. In the worst case, the memory requirements can be larger when there are many indices that are very far away. However, when they are far away from each other, that indicates that there aren't many indices in total. In common cases, memory usage can be way lower than 1/4 of before, because sub-ranges use static memory. * For some more specific numbers I benchmarked `IndexMask::from_bools` in `index_mask_from_selection` on 10.000.000 elements at various probabilities for `true` at every index: ``` Probability Old New 0 4.6 ms 0.8 ms 0.001 5.1 ms 1.3 ms 0.2 8.4 ms 1.8 ms 0.5 15.3 ms 3.0 ms 0.8 20.1 ms 3.0 ms 0.999 25.1 ms 1.7 ms 1 13.5 ms 1.1 ms ``` Pull Request: https://projects.blender.org/blender/blender/pulls/104629
2023-05-24 18:11:41 +02:00
ParamsBuilder(const Signature &signature, const IndexMask &mask)
: signature_(&signature), mask_(mask), min_array_size_(mask.min_array_size())
{
actual_params_.reserve(signature.params.size());
}
public:
/**
* The indices referenced by the #mask has to live longer than the params builder. This is
* because the it might have to destruct elements for all masked indices in the end.
*/
ParamsBuilder(const class MultiFunction &fn, const IndexMask *mask);
template<typename T> void add_readonly_single_input_value(T value, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForSingleInput(CPPType::get<T>()), expected_name);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GVArray>,
varray_tag::single{},
CPPType::get<T>(),
min_array_size_,
&value);
}
template<typename T> void add_readonly_single_input(const T *value, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForSingleInput(CPPType::get<T>()), expected_name);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GVArray>,
varray_tag::single_ref{},
CPPType::get<T>(),
min_array_size_,
value);
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
}
void add_readonly_single_input(const GSpan span, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForSingleInput(span.type()), expected_name);
BLI_assert(span.size() >= min_array_size_);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GVArray>, varray_tag::span{}, span);
}
void add_readonly_single_input(GPointer value, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForSingleInput(*value.type()), expected_name);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GVArray>,
varray_tag::single_ref{},
*value.type(),
min_array_size_,
value.get());
}
Geometry Nodes: refactor virtual array system 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
2021-11-16 10:15:51 +01:00
void add_readonly_single_input(GVArray varray, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForSingleInput(varray.type()), expected_name);
Geometry Nodes: refactor virtual array system 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
2021-11-16 10:15:51 +01:00
BLI_assert(varray.size() >= min_array_size_);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GVArray>, std::move(varray));
}
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
void add_readonly_vector_input(const GVectorArray &vector_array, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->add_readonly_vector_input(
this->resource_scope().construct<GVVectorArray_For_GVectorArray>(vector_array),
expected_name);
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
}
void add_readonly_vector_input(const GSpan single_vector, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->add_readonly_vector_input(
this->resource_scope().construct<GVVectorArray_For_SingleGSpan>(single_vector,
min_array_size_),
expected_name);
}
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
void add_readonly_vector_input(const GVVectorArray &ref, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForVectorInput(ref.type()), expected_name);
BLI_assert(ref.size() >= min_array_size_);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<const GVVectorArray *>, &ref);
}
template<typename T> void add_uninitialized_single_output(T *value, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->add_uninitialized_single_output(GMutableSpan(CPPType::get<T>(), value, 1),
expected_name);
}
void add_uninitialized_single_output(GMutableSpan ref, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForSingleOutput(ref.type()), expected_name);
BLI_assert(ref.size() >= min_array_size_);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GMutableSpan>, ref);
}
void add_ignored_single_output(StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_name(expected_name);
const int param_index = this->current_param_index();
const ParamType &param_type = signature_->params[param_index].type;
BLI_assert(param_type.category() == ParamCategory::SingleOutput);
const DataType data_type = param_type.data_type();
const CPPType &type = data_type.single_type();
if (bool(signature_->params[param_index].flag & ParamFlag::SupportsUnusedOutput)) {
/* An empty span indicates that this is ignored. */
const GMutableSpan dummy_span{type};
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GMutableSpan>, dummy_span);
}
else {
this->add_unused_output_for_unsupporting_function(type);
}
}
void add_vector_output(GVectorArray &vector_array, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForVectorOutput(vector_array.type()),
expected_name);
BLI_assert(vector_array.size() >= min_array_size_);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GVectorArray *>, &vector_array);
}
void add_single_mutable(GMutableSpan ref, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForMutableSingle(ref.type()), expected_name);
BLI_assert(ref.size() >= min_array_size_);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GMutableSpan>, ref);
}
void add_vector_mutable(GVectorArray &vector_array, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
this->assert_current_param_type(ParamType::ForMutableVector(vector_array.type()),
expected_name);
BLI_assert(vector_array.size() >= min_array_size_);
actual_params_.append_unchecked_as(std::in_place_type<GVectorArray *>, &vector_array);
}
int next_param_index() const
{
return actual_params_.size();
}
GMutableSpan computed_array(int param_index)
{
BLI_assert(ELEM(signature_->params[param_index].type.category(),
ParamCategory::SingleOutput,
ParamCategory::SingleMutable));
return std::get<GMutableSpan>(actual_params_[param_index]);
}
GVectorArray &computed_vector_array(int param_index)
{
BLI_assert(ELEM(signature_->params[param_index].type.category(),
ParamCategory::VectorOutput,
ParamCategory::VectorMutable));
return *std::get<GVectorArray *>(actual_params_[param_index]);
}
private:
void assert_current_param_type(ParamType param_type, StringRef expected_name = "")
{
UNUSED_VARS_NDEBUG(param_type, expected_name);
#ifndef NDEBUG
int param_index = this->current_param_index();
if (expected_name != "") {
StringRef actual_name = signature_->params[param_index].name;
BLI_assert(actual_name == expected_name);
}
ParamType expected_type = signature_->params[param_index].type;
BLI_assert(expected_type == param_type);
#endif
}
void assert_current_param_name(StringRef expected_name)
{
UNUSED_VARS_NDEBUG(expected_name);
#ifndef NDEBUG
if (expected_name.is_empty()) {
return;
}
const int param_index = this->current_param_index();
StringRef actual_name = signature_->params[param_index].name;
BLI_assert(actual_name == expected_name);
#endif
}
int current_param_index() const
{
return actual_params_.size();
}
ResourceScope &resource_scope()
{
if (!scope_) {
scope_ = std::make_unique<ResourceScope>();
}
return *scope_;
}
void add_unused_output_for_unsupporting_function(const CPPType &type);
};
class Params {
private:
ParamsBuilder *builder_;
public:
Params(ParamsBuilder &builder) : builder_(&builder) {}
Geometry Nodes: refactor virtual array system 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
2021-11-16 10:15:51 +01:00
template<typename T> VArray<T> readonly_single_input(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
Geometry Nodes: refactor virtual array system 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
2021-11-16 10:15:51 +01:00
const GVArray &varray = this->readonly_single_input(param_index, name);
return varray.typed<T>();
}
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
const GVArray &readonly_single_input(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
this->assert_correct_param(param_index, name, ParamCategory::SingleInput);
return std::get<GVArray>(builder_->actual_params_[param_index]);
}
/**
* \return True when the caller provided a buffer for this output parameter. This allows the
* called multi-function to skip some computation. It is still valid to call
* #uninitialized_single_output when this returns false. In this case a new temporary buffer is
* allocated.
*/
bool single_output_is_required(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
this->assert_correct_param(param_index, name, ParamCategory::SingleOutput);
return !std::get<GMutableSpan>(builder_->actual_params_[param_index]).is_empty();
}
template<typename T>
MutableSpan<T> uninitialized_single_output(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
return this->uninitialized_single_output(param_index, name).typed<T>();
}
GMutableSpan uninitialized_single_output(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
this->assert_correct_param(param_index, name, ParamCategory::SingleOutput);
BLI_assert(
!bool(builder_->signature_->params[param_index].flag & ParamFlag::SupportsUnusedOutput));
GMutableSpan span = std::get<GMutableSpan>(builder_->actual_params_[param_index]);
BLI_assert(span.size() >= builder_->min_array_size_);
return span;
}
/**
* Same as #uninitialized_single_output, but returns an empty span when the output is not
* required.
*/
template<typename T>
MutableSpan<T> uninitialized_single_output_if_required(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
return this->uninitialized_single_output_if_required(param_index, name).typed<T>();
}
GMutableSpan uninitialized_single_output_if_required(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
this->assert_correct_param(param_index, name, ParamCategory::SingleOutput);
BLI_assert(
bool(builder_->signature_->params[param_index].flag & ParamFlag::SupportsUnusedOutput));
return std::get<GMutableSpan>(builder_->actual_params_[param_index]);
}
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
template<typename T>
const VVectorArray<T> &readonly_vector_input(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
const GVVectorArray &vector_array = this->readonly_vector_input(param_index, name);
return builder_->resource_scope().construct<VVectorArray_For_GVVectorArray<T>>(vector_array);
}
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
const GVVectorArray &readonly_vector_input(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
this->assert_correct_param(param_index, name, ParamCategory::VectorInput);
return *std::get<const GVVectorArray *>(builder_->actual_params_[param_index]);
}
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
template<typename T>
GVectorArray_TypedMutableRef<T> vector_output(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
return {this->vector_output(param_index, name)};
}
GVectorArray &vector_output(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
this->assert_correct_param(param_index, name, ParamCategory::VectorOutput);
return *std::get<GVectorArray *>(builder_->actual_params_[param_index]);
}
template<typename T> MutableSpan<T> single_mutable(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
return this->single_mutable(param_index, name).typed<T>();
}
GMutableSpan single_mutable(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
this->assert_correct_param(param_index, name, ParamCategory::SingleMutable);
return std::get<GMutableSpan>(builder_->actual_params_[param_index]);
}
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
template<typename T>
GVectorArray_TypedMutableRef<T> vector_mutable(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
Functions: refactor virtual array data structures 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.
2021-03-21 19:31:24 +01:00
return {this->vector_mutable(param_index, name)};
}
GVectorArray &vector_mutable(int param_index, StringRef name = "")
{
this->assert_correct_param(param_index, name, ParamCategory::VectorMutable);
return *std::get<GVectorArray *>(builder_->actual_params_[param_index]);
}
private:
void assert_correct_param(int param_index, StringRef name, ParamType param_type)
{
UNUSED_VARS_NDEBUG(param_index, name, param_type);
#ifndef NDEBUG
BLI_assert(builder_->signature_->params[param_index].type == param_type);
if (name.size() > 0) {
BLI_assert(builder_->signature_->params[param_index].name == name);
}
#endif
}
void assert_correct_param(int param_index, StringRef name, ParamCategory category)
{
UNUSED_VARS_NDEBUG(param_index, name, category);
#ifndef NDEBUG
BLI_assert(builder_->signature_->params[param_index].type.category() == category);
if (name.size() > 0) {
BLI_assert(builder_->signature_->params[param_index].name == name);
}
#endif
}
};
} // namespace blender::fn::multi_function