Improve ShaderGenerator API#2652
Merged
jstone-lucasfilm merged 2 commits intoAcademySoftwareFoundation:mainfrom Oct 31, 2025
Merged
Conversation
niklasharrysson
approved these changes
Oct 31, 2025
Contributor
niklasharrysson
left a comment
niklasharrysson
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks great! I agree it's a lot cleaner, and more efficient too. Just need to update the doc strings as well for these methods.
ld-kerley
force-pushed
the
shadergen/simplify-createImplementation-interface
branch
from
711f218 to
fac1609
Compare
jstone-lucasfilm
merged commit e83abdb
into
AcademySoftwareFoundation:main
32 checks passed
ld-kerley
deleted the
shadergen/simplify-createImplementation-interface
branch
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
In #2604 two new API calls for the
ShaderGeneratorclass were added to allow customization of the creation ofShaderNodeImplementationobjects forNodeGraphandImplementationelements respectively.I think the API is cleaner, and more robust if we pass the actual implementation objects, and not the associated
NodeDef. In some cases these function have to re-acquire the implementation object from theNodeDef, but at the call sight we already have it.#2604 has not been included in a MaterialX release yet - so I don't believe we have any problems changing the API.