What problem does this solve or what need does it fill?
After #11439, it seems like it might be possible to nuke the breakout example's custom collision code.
The breakout example makes use of bevy::sprite::collide_aabb::collide which exists in Bevy solely to make this particular example work.
The current collision code also assumes that the ball is a rectangle, which is no longer true!
What solution would you like?
Replace the code in breakout with code based on the new bounding volume intersection stuff introduced in #11439 and remove bevy::sprite::collide_aabb::collide from Bevy.
breakout is relying on collide_aabb::collide determining "which side of the thing was collided with," so this is slightly more involved than it sounds on the surface.
What alternative(s) have you considered?
Maybe I've misjudged and it's not time for this yet.
What problem does this solve or what need does it fill?
After #11439, it seems like it might be possible to nuke the breakout example's custom collision code.
The breakout example makes use of
bevy::sprite::collide_aabb::collidewhich exists in Bevy solely to make this particular example work.The current collision code also assumes that the ball is a rectangle, which is no longer true!
What solution would you like?
Replace the code in
breakoutwith code based on the new bounding volume intersection stuff introduced in #11439 and removebevy::sprite::collide_aabb::collidefrom Bevy.breakoutis relying oncollide_aabb::collidedetermining "which side of the thing was collided with," so this is slightly more involved than it sounds on the surface.What alternative(s) have you considered?
Maybe I've misjudged and it's not time for this yet.