Merge pull request #9642 from Incognito357/Incognito357-update-docs-scene_organization

Update scene_organization.rst

tutorials/best_practices/scene_organization.rst

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Scene organization
 ==================
 
 This article covers topics related to the effective organization of
-scene content. Which nodes should one use? Where should one place them?
+scene content. Which nodes should you use? Where should you place them?
 How should they interact?
 
 How to build relationships effectively
@@ -21,10 +21,9 @@ possible. Re-using the scene in multiple places creates issues because the
 node paths do not find their targets and signal connections established in the
 editor break.
 
-To fix these problems, one must instantiate the sub-scenes without them
-requiring details about their environment. One needs to be able to trust
-that the sub-scene will create itself without being picky about how one uses
-it.
+To fix these problems, you must instantiate the sub-scenes without them
+requiring details about their environment. You need to be able to trust
+that the sub-scene will create itself without being picky about how it's used.
 
 One of the biggest things to consider in OOP is maintaining
 focused, singular-purpose classes with
@@ -35,8 +34,8 @@ maintainability) and improves their reusability.
 These OOP best practices have *several* implications for best practices
 in scene structure and script usage.
 
-**If at all possible, one should design scenes to have no dependencies.**
-That is, one should create scenes that keep everything they need within
+**If at all possible, you should design scenes to have no dependencies.**
+That is, you should create scenes that keep everything they need within
 themselves.
 
 If a scene must interact with an external context, experienced developers
@@ -46,7 +45,7 @@ This technique involves having a high-level API provide the dependencies of the
 low-level API. Why do this? Because classes which rely on their external
 environment can inadvertently trigger bugs and unexpected behavior.
 
-To do this, one must expose data and then rely on a parent context to
+To do this, you must expose data and then rely on a parent context to
 initialize it:
 
 1. Connect to a signal. Extremely safe, but should be used only to "respond" to
@@ -148,14 +147,14 @@ initialize it:
        GetNode(TargetPath); // Use parent-defined NodePath.
 
 These options hide the points of access from the child node. This in turn
-keeps the child **loosely coupled** to its environment. One can reuse it
+keeps the child **loosely coupled** to its environment. You can reuse it
 in another context without any extra changes to its API.
 
 .. note::
 
   Although the examples above illustrate parent-child relationships,
   the same principles apply towards all object relations. Nodes which
-  are siblings should only be aware of their hierarchies while an ancestor
+  are siblings should only be aware of their own hierarchies while an ancestor
   mediates their communications and references.
 
   .. tabs::
@@ -201,21 +200,21 @@ in another context without any extra changes to its API.
       }
 
   The same principles also apply to non-Node objects that maintain dependencies
-  on other objects. Whichever object actually owns the objects should manage
+  on other objects. Whichever object owns the other objects should manage
   the relationships between them.
 
 .. warning::
 
-  One should favor keeping data in-house (internal to a scene) though as
+  You should favor keeping data in-house (internal to a scene), though, as
   placing a dependency on an external context, even a loosely coupled one,
   still means that the node will expect something in its environment to be
   true. The project's design philosophies should prevent this from happening.
   If not, the code's inherent liabilities will force developers to use
   documentation to keep track of object relations on a microscopic scale; this
   is otherwise known as development hell. Writing code that relies on external
-  documentation for one to use it safely is error-prone by default.
+  documentation to use it safely is error-prone by default.
 
-  To avoid creating and maintaining such documentation, one converts the
+  To avoid creating and maintaining such documentation, you convert the
   dependent node ("child" above) into a tool script that implements
   ``_get_configuration_warnings()``.
   Returning a non-empty PackedStringArray from it will make the Scene dock generate a
@@ -234,7 +233,7 @@ in another context without any extra changes to its API.
 So, why does all this complex switcheroo work? Well, because scenes operate
 best when they operate alone. If unable to work alone, then working with
 others anonymously (with minimal hard dependencies, i.e. loose coupling)
-is the next best thing. Inevitably, changes may need to be made to a class and
+is the next best thing. Inevitably, changes may need to be made to a class, and
 if these changes cause it to interact with other scenes in unforeseen ways,
 then things will start to break down. The whole point of all this indirection
 is to avoid ending up in a situation where changing one class results in
@@ -251,44 +250,43 @@ by *all* OOP principles. Examples include...
 Choosing a node tree structure
 ------------------------------
 
-So, a developer starts work on a game only to stop at the vast possibilities
-before them. They might know what they want to do, what systems they want to
-have, but *where* to put them all? Well, how one goes about making their game
-is always up to them. One can construct node trees in countless ways.
-But, for those who are unsure, this helpful guide can give them a sample of
-a decent structure to start with.
+You might start to work on a game but get overwhelmed by the vast possibilities
+before you. You might know what you want to do, what systems you want to
+have, but *where* do you put them all? How you go about making your game
+is always up to you. You can construct node trees in countless ways.
+If you are unsure, this guide can give you a sample of a decent structure to
+start with.
 
-A game should always have a sort of "entry point"; somewhere the developer can
-definitively track where things begin so that they can follow the logic as it
-continues elsewhere. This place also serves as a bird's eye view of all of the
-other data and logic in the program. For traditional applications, this would
-be the "main" function. In this case, it would be a Main node.
+A game should always have an "entry point"; somewhere you can definitively
+track where things begin so that you can follow the logic as it continues
+elsewhere. It also serves as a bird's eye view of all other data and logic
+in the program. For traditional applications, this is normally a "main"
+function. In Godot, it's a Main node.
 
     - Node "Main" (main.gd)
 
-The ``main.gd`` script would then serve as the primary controller of one's
-game.
+The ``main.gd`` script will serve as the primary controller of your game.
 
-Then one has their actual in-game "World" (a 2D or 3D one). This can be a child
-of Main. In addition, one will need a primary GUI for their game that manages
+Then you have an in-game "World" (a 2D or 3D one). This can be a child
+of Main. In addition, you will need a primary GUI for your game that manages
 the various menus and widgets the project needs.
 
     - Node "Main" (main.gd)
         - Node2D/Node3D "World" (game_world.gd)
         - Control "GUI" (gui.gd)
 
-When changing levels, one can then swap out the children of the "World" node.
-:ref:`Changing scenes manually <doc_change_scenes_manually>` gives users full
-control over how their game world transitions.
+When changing levels, you can then swap out the children of the "World" node.
+:ref:`Changing scenes manually <doc_change_scenes_manually>` gives you full
+control over how your game world transitions.
 
-The next step is to consider what gameplay systems one's project requires.
-If one has a system that...
+The next step is to consider what gameplay systems your project requires.
+If you have a system that...
 
 1. tracks all of its data internally
 2. should be globally accessible
 3. should exist in isolation
 
-... then one should create an :ref:`autoload 'singleton' node <doc_singletons_autoload>`.
+... then you should create an :ref:`autoload 'singleton' node <doc_singletons_autoload>`.
 
 .. note::
 
@@ -298,27 +296,24 @@ If one has a system that...
   to swap out the main scene's content. This structure more or less keeps
   the "World" as the main game node.
 
-  Any GUI would need to also be a
-  singleton; be a transitory part of the "World"; or be manually added as a
-  direct child of the root. Otherwise, the GUI nodes would also delete
-  themselves during scene transitions.
+  Any GUI would also need to be either a singleton, a transitory part of the 
+  "World", or manually added as a direct child of the root. Otherwise, the 
+  GUI nodes would also delete themselves during scene transitions.
 
-If one has systems that modify other systems' data, one should define those as
-their own scripts or scenes rather than autoloads. For more information on the
-reasons, please see the
-:ref:`Autoloads versus regular nodes <doc_autoloads_versus_internal_nodes>`
-documentation.
+If you have systems that modify other systems' data, you should define those as
+their own scripts or scenes, rather than autoloads. For more information, see
+:ref:`Autoloads versus regular nodes <doc_autoloads_versus_internal_nodes>`.
 
-Each subsystem within one's game should have its own section within the
-SceneTree. One should use parent-child relationships only in cases where nodes
+Each subsystem within your game should have its own section within the
+SceneTree. You should use parent-child relationships only in cases where nodes
 are effectively elements of their parents. Does removing the parent reasonably
-mean that one should also remove the children? If not, then it should have its
+mean that the children should also be removed? If not, then it should have its
 own place in the hierarchy as a sibling or some other relation.
 
 .. note::
 
-  In some cases, one needs these separated nodes to *also* position themselves
-  relative to each other. One can use the
+  In some cases, you need these separated nodes to *also* position themselves
+  relative to each other. You can use the
   :ref:`RemoteTransform <class_RemoteTransform3D>` /
   :ref:`RemoteTransform2D <class_RemoteTransform2D>` nodes for this purpose.
   They will allow a target node to conditionally inherit selected transform
@@ -326,50 +321,51 @@ own place in the hierarchy as a sibling or some other relation.
   :ref:`NodePath <class_NodePath>`, use one of the following:
 
   1. A reliable third party, likely a parent node, to mediate the assignment.
-  2. A group, to easily pull a reference to the desired node (assuming there
+  2. A group, to pull a reference to the desired node (assuming there
      will only ever be one of the targets).
 
-  When should one do this? Well, this is subjective. The dilemma arises when
-  one must micro-manage when a node must move around the SceneTree to preserve
+  When you should do this is subjective. The dilemma arises when you must
+  micro-manage when a node must move around the SceneTree to preserve
   itself. For example...
 
   - Add a "player" node to a "room".
-  - Need to change rooms, so one must delete the current room.
-  - Before the room can be deleted, one must preserve and/or move the player.
+  - Need to change rooms, so you must delete the current room.
+  - Before the room can be deleted, you must preserve and/or move the player.
 
-    Is memory a concern?
+    If memory is not a concern, you can...
 
-    - If not, one can just create the two rooms, move the player
-      and delete the old one. No problem.
+    - Create the new room.
+    - Move the player to the new room.
+    - Delete the old room.
 
-    If so, one will need to...
+    If memory is a concern, instead you will need to...
 
     - Move the player somewhere else in the tree.
     - Delete the room.
     - Instantiate and add the new room.
-    - Re-add the player.
+    - Re-add the player to the new room.
 
-  The issue is that the player here is a "special case"; one where the
+  The issue is that the player here is a "special case" where the
   developers must *know* that they need to handle the player this way for the
-  project. As such, the only way to reliably share this information as a team
-  is to *document* it. Keeping implementation details in documentation however
-  is dangerous. It's a maintenance burden, strains code readability, and bloats
-  the intellectual content of a project unnecessarily.
+  project. The only way to reliably share this information as a team
+  is to *document* it. Keeping implementation details in documentation is
+  dangerous. It's a maintenance burden, strains code readability, and
+  unnecessarily bloats the intellectual content of a project.
 
-  In a more complex game with larger assets, it can be a better idea to simply
-  keep the player somewhere else in the SceneTree entirely. This results in:
+  In a more complex game with larger assets, it can be a better idea to keep
+  the player somewhere else in the SceneTree entirely. This results in:
 
   1. More consistency.
   2. No "special cases" that must be documented and maintained somewhere.
   3. No opportunity for errors to occur because these details are not accounted
      for.
 
-  In contrast, if one ever needs to have a child node that does *not* inherit
-  the transform of their parent, one has the following options:
+  In contrast, if you ever need a child node that does *not* inherit
+  the transform of its parent, you have the following options:
 
   1. The **declarative** solution: place a :ref:`Node <class_Node>` in between
-     them. As nodes with no transform, Nodes will not pass along such
-     information to their children.
+     them. Since it doesn't have a transform, they won't pass this information
+     to its children.
   2. The **imperative** solution: Use the ``top_level`` property for the
      :ref:`CanvasItem <class_CanvasItem_property_top_level>` or
      :ref:`Node3D <class_Node3D_property_top_level>` node. This will make
@@ -380,9 +376,9 @@ own place in the hierarchy as a sibling or some other relation.
   If building a networked game, keep in mind which nodes and gameplay systems
   are relevant to all players versus those just pertinent to the authoritative
   server. For example, users do not all need to have a copy of every players'
-  "PlayerController" logic. Instead, they need only their own. As such, keeping
-  these in a separate branch from the "world" can help simplify the management
-  of game connections and the like.
+  "PlayerController" logic - they only need their own. Keeping them in a
+  separate branch from the "world" can help simplify the management of game
+  connections and the like.
 
 The key to scene organization is to consider the SceneTree in relational terms
 rather than spatial terms. Are the nodes dependent on their parent's existence?
@@ -392,5 +388,5 @@ that parent (and likely part of that parent's scene if they aren't already).
 
 Does this mean nodes themselves are components? Not at all.
 Godot's node trees form an aggregation relationship, not one of composition.
-But while one still has the flexibility to move nodes around, it is still best
+But while you still have the flexibility to move nodes around, it is still best
 when such moves are unnecessary by default.