Hi, sorry! boost.python didn't even get contact to Source.Pythons python instance. So I firstly tried to use the plain API.
Holy sh........ it works.
Time of life wasted: four hours.

Thank you...

Of course. I commented the SDK_OnLoad function. static int numargs = 0; static PyObject* pawnbridge_numargs(PyObject *self, PyObject *args) { if (!PyArg_ParseTuple(args, ":numargs")) return NULL; return PyLong_FromLong(numargs); } static PyMethodDef PawnBrid...

I call the init func. It doesn't work.
I also tried:
But it has no effect :/

Yes, works: http://img.r4nz.de/d2565.png
I guess the way is right that it doesn't lookup my dll for PyInit_pawnbridge, but adding it to sys.path doesn't seem the solution.

In co-work with your-name-here, I debugged a little bit. This is what comes out: (bigger: http://img.unsuspicious.de/c5c33.png)
You see that this is definitely the same python instance running. Guess, it doesn't work either.

This is a SourceMod extension. It is loaded after Source.Python is loaded. Testscript is (from boost.python now). It is under plugins/pbtest/pbtest.py. import pawnbridge from core import echo_console @Event def game_start(game_event): echo_console('This is a test: {:s}'.format(pawnbridge.greet()))

Nothing happens if I remove that line.
Well, it does not initialize it. It now says "no module named pawnbridge". I'm unsure whether it's possible to extend a given boost.python instance with another library.

Hi, this is out of the official documentation where they are saying "extending an embedded python". As for Python 2, you had to call the Py_Initialize() from extending libraries too. Even removing it, it does not change anything. Your code sample looks nearly the same as the code above. I am confuse...

Your statement makes sense if considering the following sentence (same link as yours): and should be the only non-static item defined in the module file: PyMODINIT_FUNC PyInit_spam(void) { return PyModule_Create(&spammodule); } This is ok, since PyMODINIT_FUNC translates to an exporting function. Pr...

This does not change anything. Of course it does not, since this is only the internal symbol name. Python doesn't care about them. Thanks anyway :-)

Hello, I'm trying to extend SP with a C++ addon. The following exception is thrown: sp load pbtest [SP] Loading plugin 'pbtest'... [SP] Caught an Exception: Traceback (most recent call last): File '..\addons\source-python\packages\source-python\plugins\manager.py', line 72, in __missing__ instance =...

Hello, it just came up again. Dear Chrisber, Someone has tried to log into your account on Source.Python with an incorrect password at least 5 times. This person has been prevented from attempting to login to your account for the next 15 minutes. The person trying to log into your account had the fo...

I received the following e-mail seconds ago: Dear Chrisber, Someone has tried to log into your account on Source.Python with an incorrect password at least 5 times. This person has been prevented from attempting to login to your account for the next 15 minutes. The person trying to log into your acc...

Oh, well. Then I totally misunderstood the idea of Source.Python. Sorry ;-)

Hello,

is Source.Python executing scripts currently in a seperated context? Or is it designed like EventScripts does this?
If it's not the case, do you ever thought aber doing this?

Chris

Hello everyone, I've seen that you are designing the core and the API. We all know how EventScripts worked - and of course we like it. But EventScripts was contaminated with the old EventScripts Shell language (this is not being ment negative). And now you have the chance to stop thinking of old beh...

Which is good! ...and bad at the same time. This design speaks against the - more or less - strict typing of python. It is against its nature and that makes me think about to solve this. @ynh: I know it's a lot of work, but where's the problem to parse the resource files? I've did the same in Nativ...

Well, object orientation is good. But why don't you allow a lot more intuitive design?

I don't know if I'm right in this topic, but I can't find another one..
What about linking the page header to the forums index instead of the portal? I'd appreciate, it's normal behaviour in the most forums.