Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SimpleSpawner: Add "rotate with parent" property #292

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

manuq
Copy link
Contributor

@manuq manuq commented Oct 25, 2024

Add yet another setting to the SimpleSpawner. This is to rotate the spawned scene according to the SimpleSpawner parent node. Useful for changing the direction of bullets spawned from a rotated object.

@wjt
Copy link
Member

wjt commented Oct 26, 2024

In what situation do you not want this to be true? E.g. for the spaceship runner, it would have no effect either way since the obstacle/coin spawner doesn't rotate.

@manuq
Copy link
Contributor Author

manuq commented Oct 28, 2024

In what situation do you not want this to be true? E.g. for the spaceship runner, it would have no effect either way since the obstacle/coin spawner doesn't rotate.

I was only being extra careful with backwards compatibility. But yeah having true as default doesn't break either the existing demo or the example scene.

Add yet another setting to the SimpleSpawner. This is to rotate the
spawned scene according to the SimpleSpawner parent node. Useful for
changing the direction of bullets spawned from a rotated object.
@manuq manuq force-pushed the simple-spawner-rotation branch from 463bb4e to 97efc15 Compare October 28, 2024 18:30
@manuq manuq marked this pull request as draft October 28, 2024 18:36
@manuq
Copy link
Contributor Author

manuq commented Oct 28, 2024

Converting this to draft because I realize that I can use the global rotation, rather than the parent's rotation. And to address feedback from @dylanmccall over Slack.

Use global rotation instead of (possibly none) parent rotation.
@manuq
Copy link
Contributor Author

manuq commented Oct 28, 2024

The alternative to this is: #294

@manuq manuq marked this pull request as ready for review October 28, 2024 19:21
@dylanmccall
Copy link
Contributor

I'm closing this in favour of #294, which has been merged.

@dylanmccall dylanmccall closed this Nov 7, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants