Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 31 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Add particle systems and supporting example scripts #333 #334
As I was watching @pvcraven 's Arcade talk from PyCon 2018, I noticed that particles where mentioned in the "What's Next" portion of the talk. I thought I'd take a stab at an initial implementation of particle systems to get things rolling.
I focused on providing the user flexibility (the "what will the particle systems be able to do") and very little effort on the underlying implementation details (the "how") at this point (simply using
I have something functional, so, I'd love it if the community could grab this PR, run
Now, for the TL;DR...
Possible next steps:
Tests are desperately needed. The ones in tests/unit2 seem to work reasonably well under PyCharm, which I like. But there's one test that shows a bug I think. We don't have many tests yet. Being able to have py.test ones that run happily under PyCharm would help a lot with release quality. Paul Vincent Craven…
On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 6:58 PM Paul Everitt ***@***.***> wrote: As a note, though...something like this could use some tests. Can I help? — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#334 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABZTTB71ZNKnKRuLCxGgXzty6Vgn39Rhks5vZr-ygaJpZM4cE6Yo> .
Thanks! I had fun writing it...
Regarding tests, I intended particle_systems.py and particle_fireworks.py to serve as tests. But, yes, it could always use unit tests.
A question first, though. I honestly wasn't expecting this to get merged right away (but I'm excited that it has been!). I wanted to discuss a refactoring that could bring a lot more flexibility to both the particle system and arcade as a whole. But, I'd hate for a release to go out, people start to use the particle systems, and then we can't change the interface without breaking backward compatibility. I'm trying to put my refactoring thoughts into very concise words before posting it.
So, I don't want people to spend a ton of time building out tests for something that might change (maybe not, we'll see)