C# Wrapper

[GabCoolDude]

Using GDScript with c# is extremely annoying, so having a C# wrapper will make things much easier. Closes #286. Based on #351.

Changes

• Namespaces for easy use
  • PhantomCamera (Contains PhantomCamera2D, PhantomCamera3D and PhantomCameraHost)
  • PhantomCamera.Manager
  • PhantomCamera.Noise (Contains PhantomCameraNoise resources and PhantomCameraNoiseEmitters for both 2D and 3D)
• Godot type extensions for easy converting
  • Node2D.AsPhantomCamera2D()
  • Node2D.AsPhantomCameraNoiseEmitter2D()
  • Resource.AsPhantomCameraNoise2D()
  • Node3D.AsPhantomCamera3D()
  • Node3D.AsPhantomCameraNoiseEmitter3D()
  • Resource.AsPhantomCameraNoise3D()
  • Node.AsPhantomCameraHost()
• Add enums used by PhantomCamera
  • FollowMode
  • FollowLockAxis
  • LookAtMode
  • InteractiveUpdateMode
  • InterpolationMode
  • TransitionType
  • EaseType
  • ProjectionType
• Add PhantomCamera classes
  • PhantomCameraTween (Resource)
  • Camera3DResource (Resource)
  • PhantomCameraNoise3D (Resource)
  • PhantomCameraNoise2D (Resource)
  • PhantomCamera (abstract class for 2d & 3d)
  • PhantomCamera3D (Node3D)
  • PhantomCameraNoiseEmitter3D (Node3D)
  • PhantomCamera2D (Node2D
  • PhantomCameraNoiseEmitter2D (Node2D)
  • PhantomCameraHost (Node)
  • PhantomCameraManager (static class)
  • ActivePhantomCameraQueryResult
    • This is a helper class used when calling PhantomCameraManager.GetActivePhantomCamera() which may be null, 2d, or 3d
  • LimitTargetQueryResult
    • This is a helper when calling PhantomCamera2D.GetLimitTarget() which may be null, TileMap, TileMapLayer or CollisionShape2D

All underlying object types can be reference by calling the node type field:

var pcam = GetNode<Node3D>("path/to/Node3D").AsPhantomCamera3d();
pcam.Node3D.GlobalPosition = new Vector3(0, 0, 0); // access the underlying Node3D

Each class also follows the Godot convention of having a MethodName field with all the string constants for the gdscript getters and setters. PhantomCamera contains the shared strings, PhantomCamera2D and PhantomCamera3D contain their own unique strings.

[GabCoolDude]

Unfortunately the merge didn't go as I planned, so a LOT of the UIDs changed (just look at the files changed count, it went from 25 to 61), I don't know if that might be a problem though. I also did some changes like adding PhantomCameraNoise3D and PhantomCameraNoiseEmitter3D, more coming soon.

[sircodemane]

🙌 this is awesome to see, thank you so much for picking this up @GabCoolDude

[GabCoolDude]

If a variable has multiple setters, should I add them all, or just one ? Example:

[sircodemane]

If a variable has multiple setters, should I add them all, or just one ? Example:

@GabCoolDude I don't have a good answer for this. I think for safety it would be appropriate to offer whatever is supported by the godot objects so the interfaces match closely. One small C# specific improvement you could probably add is just having one AppendFollowTargets() method that takes a variadic number of targets. I say just follow your heart, but @ramokz may have a different opinion lol

[ramokz]

If a variable has multiple setters, should I add them all, or just one ?

Yes, all public functions should be included. So if it exists in the GDScript version / documentation site, the C# wrapper should also include them. Otherwise, we end up with method availability discrepancies between GDScript and C# users.

A minor note in the C# snippet above, the "s" in "Targets" is important.
Basically, follow_target and follow_targets are two separate properties. The former is Node2D/3D and the latter is an Array[2D/3D]. E.g. EraseFollowTarget() might imply you're erasing the follow_target, but it's actually removing a node from follow_targets array.

One small C# specific improvement you could probably add is just having one AppendFollowTargets() method that takes a variadic number of targets.

Are you thinking of combining AppendFollowTargets and AppendFollowTargetsArray into a function overload? Both functions exist on in the GDScript, which doesn't support overloading, variant, where each takes a different parameter, Node vs. Array[Node]. Think keeping them separate keeps documentation discrepancies to a minimum?

[ramokz]

As an aside, think the Unit test bit should be pulled out of this PR and into a separate one.

Ideally, want to keep PRs as specific as possible, so it doesn't take longer than necessary to get merged and split the review process into smaller, more specific, chunks.

[GabCoolDude]

As an aside, think the Unit test bit should be pulled out of this PR and into a separate one.

Ideally, want to keep PRs as specific as possible, so it doesn't take longer than necessary to get merged and split the review process into smaller, more specific, chunks.

I agree, especially since I am having a bit of trouble with it currently. Will be removed in the next commit.

[GabCoolDude]

Should I put doc comments on each variable and class, just like in GDScript, or should I leave them be ? I think they'd be quite useful, because you wouldn't have to pull up the documentation in a browser tab and would just hover over the property to see what it does.

[ramokz]

Should I put doc comments on each variable and class, just like in GDScript, or should I leave them be ? I think they'd be quite useful, because you wouldn't have to pull up the documentation in a browser tab and would just hover over the property to see what it does.

From a DX perspective, it makes total sense.

However, from a maintainability perspective, I am reluctant to add it simply because of the extra work to keep descriptions in sync across the various places. Think it's one of those things where once you start doing it, you have to keep doing it.
It is sadly already getting cumbersome with keeping the GDScripts and the documentation site aligned whenever typos are found or other changes are needed. So I am cautious about adding more work to keep track of and maintain than absolutely necessary.

You can also access the documentation from Godot directly by looking it up by using Help > Search Help... (shortcut F1) and searching for the specific addon class. Not as elegant as seeing it in the IDE, but it's a faster way to look up things without an internet connection or having to open the site.

[GabCoolDude]

Turns out that the method we had before was the best way to go about it without creating C# bindings using C++. I had a little conversation in the Godot Engine discord related to an error I had, which would've caused the whole C# wrapper to not work with GetNode<>() and As<>(), and it turns out that there is no way to fix it because Godot will recognize the result from GetNode() as a Node and type casting it to PhantomCamera3D or any other type will just cause an error, and that the method we had before was actually the best method. I will now be reverting the previous commit.

[sircodemane]

Turns out that the method we had before was the best way to go about it without creating C# bindings using C++. I had a little conversation in the Godot Engine discord related to an error I had, which would've caused the whole C# wrapper to not work with GetNode<>() and As<>(), and it turns out that there is no way to fix it because Godot will recognize the result from GetNode() as a Node and type casting it to PhantomCamera3D or any other type will just cause an error, and that the method we had before was actually the best method. I will now be reverting the previous commit.

Sorry I wasn't able to provide this insight sooner. I saw your question about this last night and I could not recall the exact reason I chose that method. I thought that it was a DX choice because it also allowed the ability to create the C# extension methods. But I think I remember having issues trying the As<>() method too. As for not extending the base Node/Node3D classes, I don't remember the exact reasoning, but I believe there was another technical limitation there as well, but it may also have been a personal preference of composition instead of inheritance.

Some of the choices I made were also because I was looking at other popular plugins to see their approach to adding C# support. I think DialogueManager was one I took a lot of inspiration from. Now that you've spent some time with the code, it might be worth looking through the conversations on the old PR again to see if there are any useful insights there.

Also, nice work on this!

[ramokz]

That's a good discovery! Thanks for looking into it. Yeah, let's go with what the previous iteration was doing.
I will make a note to document it on the site post PR merge.

[ramokz]

This is just a high-level review of the PR, have yet to dig into the various class files.

Still trying to get a custom build of Godot mono working to test various things, but it is proving more cumbersome than I had hoped.

[GabCoolDude]

Still trying to get a custom build of Godot mono working to test various things, but it is proving more cumbersome than I had hoped.

You can just download the .NET version from the website. If you use the Steam version of Godot, you can still use it with this method.

[ramokz]

You can just download the .NET version from the website. If you use the Steam version of Godot, you can still use it with this method.

Thanks! But was referring to compiling a mono build of the Godot engine itself. It might just be more complicated due to my OS environment not playing nicely with mono / dotnet. At the minute, the custom build thinks I'm using an outdated C# version, which doesn't really make sense… It works fine with a typical Godot mono executable, so it's likely a build process step on my part.

For a bit of context, the reason I need to compile the engine locally is to test a few custom export templates that most users will not need, but those who do will raise an issue about it. The reason it matters is that it might mean the way the C# classes are currently set up would need a structural change.

[ramokz]

Managed to figure out what the issue was and got around to testing the custom export templates.
It all seems to run fine without any issues, so structurally it should all be sound 🎉

Will do a sweep of all the properties and methods next to make sure all are accounted for, so there's no functionality discrepancies between this and GDScript.

[ramokz]

Got through all the properties and methods of the various GD classes and compared them with the C# classes in this PR. Most of it checks out, and only spotted a few relatively minor things.

After those changes are made, I think we can merge this into a beta branch and to share publicly to get any feedback before merging into main. Mainly to avoid making potential breaking changes right after release. Given the size and complexity of this PR, I would want to make sure we get it as right as we can.

Account doesn't exist, possibly a bot

[ramokz]

Looks good! Will merge this into a beta branch for people to test out and provide feedback before adding this to a proper public release.

Really appreciate the effort getting this working @sircodemane @GabCoolDude!