World/Udon Bugs & Feature Requests

Post about current World or Udon bugs feature requests. One item per post!
Non-constructive and off-topic posts will be moved or deleted.
Using [UdonBehaviourSyncMode(BehaviourSyncMode.NoVariableSync)] just continues using last set value on an object with no other scripts
When adding [UdonBehaviourSyncMode(BehaviourSyncMode.NoVariableSync)] to an udon# class, It will just continue using the last setting. For example if you add [UdonBehaviourSyncMode(BehaviourSyncMode.Continuous)] and then compile, then change it to [UdonBehaviourSyncMode(BehaviourSyncMode.NoVariableSync)] and compile again, you get the expected behavior, and calling SendCustomNetworkEvent() works. If you then change it to [UdonBehaviourSyncMode(BehaviourSyncMode.None)] and compile, then change it to [UdonBehaviourSyncMode(BehaviourSyncMode.NoVariableSync)] and compile again It will continue to behave exactly as if it's still set to None. SendCustomNetworkEvent() does not work. This is on an object that doesn't have any other scripts on it. I haven't tested the case with other scripts. You can look at the debug inspector to confirm that this is what is happening. From the documentation: "NoVariableSync: Enforces that there are no synced variables on the behaviour, hides the sync mode selection dropdown, and allows you to use the behaviours on GameObjects that use either Manual or Continuous sync." It seems like the case where a script using NoVariableSync being used on an object that doesn't have another script on it may have been overlooked. Since I'm updating a script in a prefab I'm releasing from None to NoVariableSync because I want to use network events now, it's not going to work for anyone updating to the new version. I am forced to set it to Continuous. Does anyone know if it makes any difference to bandwidth usage?
1
·

tracked

Pivot back to WebAssembly-based Udon 2
It was announced on yesterday's developer update that Udon 2 had been scrapped for "Soba". Based on the information we have been given, they're making the equivalent to Udon 1.1. In the words of the VRChat team, specifically Fax: Soba will have comparable or worse performance than current UdonSharp at launch with "promised" improvements in the future. But as we know, VRChat is unreliable with promises, so I'm hesitant to believe that. Soba will lack generics support at launch (no List<T> or Dictionary<T>, among others) Soba will not have everything promised in Udon 2 This is extremely dissapointing for me, and many other VRChat creators. Udon 2 was supposed to be the superfast feature-rich improvement over current Udon To see that they have opted to make a custom VM which, based on the facts we have right now, will not achieve Udon 2's speeds or feature parity is a disappointment to the community and a testament to how easier > better in VRChat's eyes. The reasons for this change are also abysmal. They said that Udon 2 "would have distracted us from adding feature requests that the community had been asking for". This shows how deaf VRChat is around community feedback, since Udon 2 was one of the most exciting features for me and many other creators, plus, this wasn't an issue when you were waving your dick about making stickers, boops and other features nobody asked for. Alongside this, based on VRChat's technical reasoning, it appears that WebAssembly was scrapped because the new engineer(s) working on Soba didn't bother to debug Udon 2, it appears some benchmarks were done, issues were found, and they didn't bother to try and debug it, or just made up some excuse, instead opting for yet another sloppy custom VM. I apologise for my irritated language, but it is growing rather agitating that VRChat cannot competently deliver on a highly anticipated feature without taking years and having a 50/50 chance of scrapping it. Udon 2 was the better choice objectively, so I implore you to rethink this decision and bring back WebAssembly based Udon 2.
30
Load More