rust-orphan-rules VS bevy

Well, unless someone comes up with better, compatible rules, the orpan rules are gonna stick around.

Additionally there are other issues with rust currently. Compile time code (ala constexpr) is not up to par with C++20 (not really close). The const generic aren't as powerful as C++20 which added non primitive non type template parameters (though with you stuck with C++14, it actually is significantly better than what you have, again, if you're going to use C++, just use 20). Generics accepting closures is a bit more of an ordeal in rust, compared to C++. Also C++'s Duck Typed templates allow for some uncharacteristically strong typing compared to what is expressible in Rust generics currently. Now, duck typed templates do have major downsides, for example the entire feature of concepts is completely irrelevant in rust, but required for sane DTT type bounds, but they also have major upsides. Rust currently doesn't have "negative trait bounds", basically "This objected does not implement this trait, or std::enable_if> or the equivalent concepts implementation. Rust also doesn't have trait specializations, basically template specialization. Do note all features I've talked about to this point have nightly options, they just are at various stages of being stable/complete. Another issue is the orphan rule, though this is kind of a problem in C++ too in some respects, and that's unlikely to change drastically, since there are legitimate reasons for it's existence. For a lot of code none of these things are big deals, others they are, which is why you find inconsistent feed back on these issues.

Not that simple... hence why Orphan rule is still in-place. The struct wrapper was implemented in Rust as a temporary safe work-around. However, they are making progress on a solution: https://github.com/Ixrec/rust-orphan-rules/issues/1

That's still not an entirely complete explanation because there's more nuanced situations which aren't completely foreign but are foreign enough that if allowed, two crates could write the same impls. Some of the definitions are still unofficial as far as am I'm aware. For the best reference I’ve seen so far see this for more details.

In our crate the compiler doesn't know when calling MyTrait methods on MyStruct whether to use the implementation defined in crate 3 or crate 4! Rust has a set of orphan rules to prevent this situation from happening.

Sadly because of the rusts orphan rule you cannot implement a Trait on a Type where you do not own one or the other. So, apart from upstream contributions your only options are either a new Trait or a new Type.

If anyone is looking for additional background about orphan rules, check out https://github.com/Ixrec/rust-orphan-rules

Bevy. A very young engine where you need to write the game entirely in Rust—that was appealing. But fatal flaws overshadowed everything: no editor, the engine brutally enforces the ECS approach, and the game's architecture must literally bend to fit this paradigm. So, you won't migrate to another engine at all—you just throw away all the code and start from scratch.

Missing one of the best choices as long as "maturity" isn't on the top of your list: Bevy - https://bevyengine.org/

Game engine written in Rust, leveraging ECS in almost every place and way, with a really capable WASM export option. Wrestling ECS for the first time might take you some time, but in my experience helps you keep game code as clean and decoupled as game code could be.

I don't see WASM/WebGPU changing anything when it comes to gaming, as an industry, personally. 3d visualizations and interactive websites? Yeah definitely a nice improvement over WebGL 2, if years late.

WebGPU is pretty far behind what AAA games are using even as of 6 years ago. There's extra overhead and security in the WebGPU spec that AAA games do not want. Browsers do not lend themselves to downloading 300gb of assets.

Additionally, indie devs aren't using Steam for the technical capabilities. It's purely about marketshare. Video games are a highly saturated market. The users are all on Steam, getting their recommendations from Steam, and buying games in Steam sales. Hence all the indie developers publish to Steam. I don't see a web browser being appealing as a platform, because there's no way for developers to advertise to users.

That's also only indie games. AAA games use their own launchers, because they don't _need_ the discoverability from being on Steam. So they don't, and avoid the fees. If anything users _want_ the Steam monopoly, because they like the platform, and hate the walled garden launchers from AAA companies.

(I work on high end rendering features for the Bevy game engine https://bevyengine.org, and have extensive experience with WebGPU)

I was working through an example in the repo for the Bevy game engine recently and came across this code

That's possible. I did spend quite a bit of time tinkering with compiler flags, and followed the recommendations.

Some notes I found just now seems to agree with my results, though: https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/3978#issuecomment-...

I cannot recommend immediate mode GUI programming based on the limitations I've experienced working with egui.

egui does not support putting two widgets in the center of the screen: https://github.com/emilk/egui/issues/3211

It's really easy to get started with immediate mode, it's really easy to bust out some UI, but the second you start trying to involve dynamically resized context and responsive layouts -- abandon all hope. The fact it has to calculate everything in a single pass makes these things hard/impossible.

... that said, I'm still using it for https://ant.care/ (https://github.com/MeoMix/symbiants) because it's the best thing I've found. I'm crossing my fingers that Bevy's UI story (or Kayak https://github.com/StarArawn/kayak_ui) become significantly more fleshed out sooner rather than later. Bevy 0.13 should have lots more in this area though (https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/9538)

I've also been enjoying building My First Game™ in Bevy using ECS. The community around Bevy really shines, but Flecs (https://github.com/SanderMertens/flecs) is arguably a more mature, open-source ECS implementation. You don't get to write in Rust, though, which makes it less cool in my book :)

I'm not very proud of the code I've written because I've found writing a game to be much more confusing than building websites + backends, but, as the author notes, it certainly feels more elegant than OOP or globals given the context.

I'm building for WASM and Bevy's parallelism isn't supported in that context (yet? https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/4078), so the performance wins are just so-so. Sharing a thread with UI rendering suuucks.

If anyone wants to browse some code or ask questions, feel free! https://github.com/MeoMix/symbiants

These days, some game engines have done pretty well at making compute shaders easy to use (such as Bevy [1] -- disclaimer, I contribute to that engine). But telling the scientific/financial/etc. community that they need to run their code inside a game engine to get a decent experience is a hard sell. It's not a great situation compared to how easy it is on NVIDIA's stack.

[1]: https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/blob/main/examples/shader...

This is the API you need: https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/9774