[Mathias.]

that what IDE are for, avoid you to create script files, do everything for you basically so you can just write your code and start it with a click.

[Wliu]

Except that Sourcepawn files cannot be "started" natively...I highly doubt it'd be in anyone's best interest to have an IDE that compiles the plugin, uploads it to a server, starts up TF2 or whatever Source game, and then connects you to that server.

That said, there are already text editors that have some Sourcepawn support (Notepad++, Sublime, Atom, etc).

[nergal]

Originally Posted by Wliu Except that Sourcepawn files cannot be "started" natively...I highly doubt it'd be in anyone's best interest to have an IDE that compiles the plugin, uploads it to a server, starts up TF2 or whatever Source game, and then connects you to that server. That said, there are already text editors that have some Sourcepawn support (Notepad++, Sublime, Atom, etc).

The only reason I brought up IDEs is because I'd definitely like having a personal and stand alone API referencer that can automatically refresh itself everytime I make a custom .inc file or other stuff.

[Wliu]

Originally Posted by nergal The only reason I brought up IDEs is because I'd definitely like having a personal and stand alone API referencer that can automatically refresh itself everytime I make a custom .inc file or other stuff.

My reply was mostly directed towards Black-Rabbit, but your API referencer sounds nice .

[WildCard65]

Will SM 1.8 have changes to the JIT compiler of SM as well as new bytecode?

[Mathias.]

I got problem with methodmaps, I can't create a proper destructor function, it only expect a = (calling a native)

PHP Code:

methodmap CGGCore
{
    public CGGCore() 
    { 
        return view_as<CGGCore>Core_Initialize(); 
    }

    public ~CGGCore() { Core_Unload(); }
} 


http://gyazo.com/1f494cd45de4d681ce26bc862f7f158c

[psychonic]

Destructors can only be implemented as natives, not inline.

[Mathias.]

Originally Posted by psychonic Destructors can only be implemented as natives, not inline.

okay thank you

[Mathias.]

Here something Im trying to figure out http://gyazo.com/c201b7ddb7c5d4c9ddfb648008213b85

Where those native came from? What do I have to do in my end if I want to create a native but only callable by property or a method inside a methodmap without the need to declare the native as a general method? Can we do the same with the constructor?

[BAILOPAN]

In that example, there is a native called "ConVar.BoolValue.get" and another called "ConVar.BoolValue.set". They are only accessible through methodmaps.

For a method called Y on methodmap X, the native name should be exposed as "X.Y". For properties, you append ".get" and/or ".set". For constructors, you'd get "X.X". For example, "ConVar.ConVar".

This is only really relevant to extensions/core. Technically you can implement a methodmap and then map the native names with CreateNative.