Recursive Instancer Other Approach #6200
Closed
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
|
Since our main motivation is to make a USD adaptor rather than a general-purpose feature of the Gaffer Instancer, I wonder if this even more minimal approach has merit : johnhaddon@e8dca96#diff-180b29d3aeae7ca4102faf9df42363b8126779e833e2889870ed38ca33639515R3200-R3207. Seems like we could actually implement this hack entirely in Python? |
|
Closing, since I think our new plan is to use the pure-python approach outlined in the comment above. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As requested on #6194, here is an absolutely minimal set of changes to allow recursive instancing. This does allow using a single node to adapt a USD scene with instancing of instancers ( by plugging the output of an Instancer back into it's prototypes ), but I don't yet see a path to actually deploying it. Currently there is nothing to prevent a casual user from accidentally connecting a cycle into
prototypes, and if that connection goes through even a dot, then the special case for a direct loop in hashBranchSetNames won't trigger, resulting in an immediate crash.