Canvas widget

[hecrj]

A widget to draw freely in 2D or 3D. It could be used to draw charts, implement a Paint clone, a CAD application, etc.

As a first approach, we could expose the underlying renderer directly here, and couple this widget with it (wgpu for now). Once wgpu gets WebGL or WebGPU support, this widget will be able to run on web too. The renderer primitive could be a simple texture that the widget draws to.

In the long run, we could expose a renderer-agnostic abstraction to perform the drawing.

[Xaeroxe]

Just gonna drop my two cents here.

Rendering a custom widget doesn't make much sense unless you know both the renderer and the widget.

This is where low level rendering access becomes important, for example if I'm rendering a virtual scene in my widget I'll probably want to control that via a graphics card. However not all rendering stacks will have a GPU available to them, so it may be hard to present this in a platform agnostic way. Additionally, the tech used to access the GPU may differ from platform to platform.

So to create this I'd define the drawing trait in terms of the rendering stack, which is actually really similar to what you've already done with the myriad "Renderer" traits. So I suppose the takeaway of my comment is based around this sentence in the initial comment

In the long run, we could expose a renderer-agnostic abstraction to perform the drawing.

That's probably not worth doing, as the means by which a custom widget could be rendered are vast and unknowable from the perspective of iced.

[parasyte]

I started working on a first pass at this. Having problems with the Renderer trait exported from iced_native, and Application exported from iced_core.

I need some way to update the Renderer with a custom wgpu::Pipeline (created by user code, outside of iced. I thought about passing a closure into Application::run, but specifying the types is causing me grief; what's the input? With the wgpu backend, we want a wgpu::Device, and the output is a CanvasPipeline type that the Renderer can use. This really complicates the public API.

The only improvement I can think of trying is using Box<dyn Any> for both input and output types, and try to downcast them where needed.

Does anyone have any other suggestions? This would probably be a lot easier without the multiple abstraction layers spread across several crates. I only care about supporting wgpu for now (see the comment directly above for rationale; I completely agree with that sentiment.)

Because of these challenges, I'm not comfortable sharing the code. I just don't think it's reviewable in this state.

[hecrj]

The first step here is to create a Canvas widget with an API similar to the CanvasRenderingContext2D on the Web.

I think an implementation of this API can be achieved without exposing internal rendering details, like pipelines or shaders.

The cool thing about this approach is that we could make the Canvas widget work on the Web almost for free with a trivial implementation.

There has been some work done in this direction and it looks promising. I think I'll be able to share something soon!

---

@parasyte Could you describe your use case? Why do you need to create custom pipelines? I believe you would need a different kind of widget than the one described in this issue, at least for now.

If you want to render your scene with Iced on top, I believe the way to go for that is to integrate your current wgpu renderer with the iced_wgpu crate. As you probably are aware, this is currently not possible. However, I think it's better to invest time exploring in that direction rather than trying to create a Canvas widget that does too much without clear boundaries.

[parasyte]

The specific use case I have in mind is building a tile map editor (like Tiled). The CanvasRenderingContext2D API isn’t much value to me, since I would almost exclusively make use of the ImageData equivalent. The Canvas2D API has a lot of power, but it is a poor fit for applications like this, not to mention CAD and 3D modeling.

ImageData isn’t a great fit either. WebGL is much closer to what I would like. It would just make things like indexed palette rendering and dithering so much easier.

These reasons (and others; caching, and no support for animations) rules out the Image widget for me, too. Hope that helps understand where I’m coming from.

[hecrj]

@parasyte Now that #183 and #193 have landed, I think we should be able to start exploring more powerful solutions to satisfy use cases similar to yours.

While #193 only supports basic 2D graphics, I think it should be possible to build a similar widget for advanced graphics (custom shaders, 3D, etc.) by exposing wgpu directly.

[hecrj]

@n826vnl8 I think the seeds are planted and an advanced canvas widget can be implemented using the current Canvas implementation as a guide while adding a Primitive::Texture or similar to iced_wgpu.

Because of this, I am moving on to working on other features that may challenge the current design of the library (like #27, #30, and #31) and can help us notice any shortcomings.

Thus, no plans yet! That said, I will happily discuss use cases and review any design ideas. Everyone is welcome to join the Zulip server and start a topic there!

[dhardy]

Possibly of interest, I achieved this in KAS via use of a CustomPipe trait — the user implements this plus a CustomWindow trait, and uses the latter to parametrise the toolkit's pipeline. This only works because the rendering pipeline is extensible and still requires a downcast to do the actual drawing. Perhaps a similar method could be used in Iced?

BTW I think iced_wgpu docs are missing the "canvas" feature?