Skip to content

Sync remaining template files - #2051

Open
Togira123 wants to merge 1 commit into
godotengine:masterfrom
Togira123:sync_more_templates
Open

Sync remaining template files#2051
Togira123 wants to merge 1 commit into
godotengine:masterfrom
Togira123:sync_more_templates

Conversation

@Togira123

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Notably, this removes two files that were both removed in upstream godot: search_array.hpp and thread_work_pool.hpp.
There are a few things that I'm unsure about still:

  • thread_work_pool.hpp has been removed in upstream 4 years ago (here: Remove ThreadWorkPool, replace by WorkerThreadPool godot#63354), I'm not sure whether removing it in godot-cpp has just been forgotten or if there's a reason it's still here.
  • # In include/godot_cpp/templates/thread_work_pool.hpp
    front.append("Semaphore")
    This mentions the removed file, perhaps we can remove this line then, not sure whether that'd break other things though.
  • I haven't synced spin_lock.hpp despite it being outdated because we'd have to access Thread::CACHE_LINE_BYTES which does not exist currently, so we'd either have to sync the threads file too or add it in generation and I'm not sure if we want to do either of those.
  • I re-added the struct in hashfuncs.hpp I accidentally removed in my last PR, but if you prefer that I fully sync the file instead in this PR I can do that too.

@dsnopek

dsnopek commented Sep 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Thanks!

  • # In include/godot_cpp/templates/thread_work_pool.hpp
    front.append("Semaphore")
    This mentions the removed file, perhaps we can remove this line then, not sure whether that'd break other things though.

I think you should remove those lines - I don't expect it to cause problems, and it would be nice to have fewer classes that are always enabled

Otherwise, skimming the changes here, they seem OK to me! I think it'd be fine to take out of draft

@dsnopek dsnopek added the enhancement This is an enhancement on the current functionality label Sep 1, 2026
@dsnopek dsnopek added this to the 10.x milestone Sep 1, 2026
@Togira123
Togira123 marked this pull request as ready for review September 1, 2026 17:44
@Togira123
Togira123 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 1, 2026 17:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement This is an enhancement on the current functionality

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants