added frame count to FrameTimeDiagnosticsPlugin #678
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
karroffel
added
C-Enhancement
joshuajbouw
approved these changes
Oct 14, 2020
cart
reviewed
Oct 14, 2020
| .add_system(Self::diagnostic_system.system()); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| impl FrameTimeDiagnosticsPlugin { | ||
| pub const FPS: DiagnosticId = DiagnosticId::from_u128(288146834822086093791974408528866909483); | ||
| pub const FRAME_COUNT: DiagnosticId = | ||
| DiagnosticId::from_u128(54021991829115352065418785002088010277); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think id prefer a fully-random uuid just so these are more distinguishable when printed. I generated one for you :)
73441630925388532774622109383099159699
cart
reviewed
Oct 14, 2020
| if time.delta_seconds_f64 == 0.0 { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| state.frame_count += 1.0; | ||
| diagnostics.add_measurement(Self::FRAME_COUNT, state.frame_count); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think we should probably move this above the time.delta_seconds_f64 == 0.0 check. A frame still happens even if the delta time is 0.
cart
approved these changes
Oct 14, 2020
joshuajbouw
pushed a commit
to joshuajbouw/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2020
added frame count to FrameTimeDiagnosticsPlugin
|
Just out of curiosity, why use an f64 instead of a u64 for the frame count (to avoid precision stuff)? |
All diagnostics are saved as |
|
@mockersf oh okay, thank you |
bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 17, 2022
Original reasoning: #678 (comment) That reasoning doesn't seem valid IMO since eventually +1 will do nothing. Using an integer is more intuitive and will wrap around which is probably better than getting stuck.
robtfm
pushed a commit
to robtfm/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
May 17, 2022
Original reasoning: bevyengine#678 (comment) That reasoning doesn't seem valid IMO since eventually +1 will do nothing. Using an integer is more intuitive and will wrap around which is probably better than getting stuck.
exjam
pushed a commit
to exjam/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
May 22, 2022
Original reasoning: bevyengine#678 (comment) That reasoning doesn't seem valid IMO since eventually +1 will do nothing. Using an integer is more intuitive and will wrap around which is probably better than getting stuck.
ItsDoot
pushed a commit
to ItsDoot/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2023
Original reasoning: bevyengine#678 (comment) That reasoning doesn't seem valid IMO since eventually +1 will do nothing. Using an integer is more intuitive and will wrap around which is probably better than getting stuck.
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.
see issue #193