Because We Can. No, actually, this will be used for upcoming material
layers, it's not a bloat. However, this means you can do things like
Trade::MaterialData weDoCssHere{{}, {
{"color", "navy"},
{"highlight", "rgba(35, 255, 78, 0.75)"},
{"dropShadow", "var(--shadow-color)"}
}};
Suited mainly for custom app-specific material properties (e.g., actual
texture pointers and handles), not really planning on using this in
Magnum itself.
AbstractMaterialData is now just a typedef to MaterialData, with all
existing public APIs moved to (and marked as deprecated, if they don't
make sense anymore). The new class doesn't have a virtual destructor as
that's not the desired use anymore -- and AbstractImporter::material()
APIs will be returning an Optional instead of a Pointer, which means any
potential subclasses will be sliced away.
PhongMaterialData is reimplemented using the new key/value store,
with no own members anymore -- thus having the same size as
MaterialData, and safe to be casted from it to access the helper APIs.
Compared to previous AbstractMaterialData, which was always just a
single type, the new data can describe several different materials at
once. This is the case for example with glTF, where a material can be
metallic/roughness but also have an alternative description using
specular/glossiness.
Currently the usage is undocumented, but when everything is in place, if
a material advertises given type, it can be then cast to one of
its convenience subclasses.
Better since it has the same prefix as other texture-related attributes,
such as *TextureMatrix(). Not using *TextureCoordinateSet() because
that's overly long, *TextureSet() is OTOH confusing (and especially so
if we'd introduce *TextureLayer()).
Those would be unfortunately very hard to preserve when switching to the
new MaterialData. These accessors mattered mostly only when populating
the instance (i.e., in importer plugins) so such breakage shouldn't be
too much of a problem for regular users.
With blackjack and actually working properly on all platforms.
Seriously, did nobody ever try to use the vanilla version on Mac or MSYS
since it was added several years ago in CMake 3.7?