glam![Build Status] ![codecov-badge] ![Latest Version] ![docs] ![Minimum Supported Rust Version]
This crate uses bytemuck to implement a zero-cost[^zero_cost] strongly typed interface on top of glam.
The API is similar to euclid, but more ergonomic (although YMMV).
One of the API design goals of glam is to avoid complexity by not going
bananas with traits and generics. This crate is the opposite. But it does
allow you to easily drop down to plain glam when needed.
See the docs module for detailed documentation.
compile times and make debug builds slower due to increased code size.
Unit] for that struct. [Unit::Scalar] determines the primitive
type used in vector components.f32, f64, i32, or u32 (or bitwise compatible with
one of them)[^custom_scalar].The basic primitive scalars are also units in their own right ("untyped").
[Angle<T>] is an example of a generic custom scalar.
```rust use glamour::prelude::*;
struct MyUnit; impl Unit for MyUnit { type Scalar = f32; }
// Start using your new unit:
let vector: Vector4
// Use untyped units when needed:
let vectoruntyped: &Vector4
// Use glam when needed: let vectorraw: &glam::Vec4 = vector.asraw(); ```
See the documentation module for more examples.
Size2] are called width and
height, rather than x and y.glam types when needed.glameuclidbytemuck.glamglam is a very approachable API.glam is able to support a wide range of transformation primitives (e.g.
[glam::Affine3A], [glam::Quat], etc.), and the user has a lot of
flexibility to choose the most performant kind for their use case. These are
simply unimplemented in glamour.euclidUnit].glam.no_std.glam API conventions - "principle of least surprise".glam directly).
Comprehensive benchmarks pending.glam).glam API. Instead, we make it really easy (and
performant) to drop down to glam types when needed.glam API. It's OK to use glam types in public APIs.The "AoSoA" pattern ("extra wide" vector types). Use ultraviolet instead[^use_uv].
library are actually compatible with the non-wide vector types in
Ultraviolet, so it may actually just work (using bytemuck::cast() and
friends), but no guarantees.
All operations should perform exactly the same as their glam counterparts.
There is a zero-tolerance policy for overhead in release builds.
However, debug build performance is also important in some cases. For example, for a video game it can make the difference between being playable or not in debug mode.
This crate should be expected to incur an overhead of about a factor 2 compared
to glam in debug builds. This may be alleviated in the future, but it seems
that even glam itself does not go out of its way to perform well in debug
builds.