Add ability to execute scripts inside a script scope

[KitRifty]

Adds an extra parameter to VScriptExecute's constructor to specify a script scope, or use root table by default.

Also added a VScript_ReleaseScript native to pair with VScript_CompileScript(File). Since it exists on the interface, I figured it'd be best to stay on the safe side in case more specialized code takes place versus releasing it using ReleaseValue.

I also corrected the offsets for both CompileScript and ReleaseScript for TF2. Both have been tested on TF2 Windows and Linux, but I haven't tested in other games so ReleaseScript's offsets in "#default" is just a guess. For TF2 specifically, I'm not sure if I should've used ExtraOffsets.

I used this code to test them along with the scopes:

Handle g_SDKCallGetScriptScope;

public void OnPluginStart()
{
	RegConsoleCmd("vscript_test", Command_Test);

	GameData gameData = new GameData("vscript_test");

	StartPrepSDKCall(SDKCall_Entity);
	PrepSDKCall_SetFromConf(gameData, SDKConf_Signature, "CBaseEntity::GetScriptScope");
	PrepSDKCall_SetReturnInfo(SDKType_PlainOldData, SDKPass_Plain);
	g_SDKCallGetScriptScope = EndPrepSDKCall();

	delete gameData;
}

ScriptStatus_t RunScript(const char[] code, HSCRIPT scope = view_as<HSCRIPT>(0))
{
	HSCRIPT script = VScript_CompileScript(code);
	if (!script)
	{
		return SCRIPT_ERROR;
	}

	VScriptExecute exec = new VScriptExecute(script, scope);
	ScriptStatus_t result = exec.Execute();
	delete exec;
	VScript_ReleaseScript(script);

	return result;
}

Action Command_Test(int client, int args)
{
	SetVariantString("self.ValidateScriptScope()");
	AcceptEntityInput(client, "RunScriptCode");

	HSCRIPT scope = SDKCall(g_SDKCallGetScriptScope, client);

	if (scope)
	{
		scope.SetValue("__test_value", FIELD_INTEGER, 7891);

		RunScript("__my_temp <- []; __my_temp.append(123)", scope);

		SetVariantString("__my_temp.append(64)");
		AcceptEntityInput(client, "RunScriptCode");

		SetVariantString("__DumpScope(1, self.GetScriptScope())");
		AcceptEntityInput(client, "RunScriptCode");
	}

	return Plugin_Handled;
}

vscript_test.txt:

"Games"
{
	"#default"
	{
		"Signatures"
		{
			"CBaseEntity::GetScriptScope"
			{
				"library"	"server"
				"linux"		"@_ZN11CBaseEntity14GetScriptScopeEv"
				"windows"	"\x8B\x89\x2A\x2A\x2A\x2A\x33\xC0\x83"
			}
		}
	}
}

Output:

   self = ([2] player)
   __test_value = 7891
   __vname = "_f730_player"
   __my_temp(ARRAY)
   [
      0 = 123
      1 = 64
   ]
   __vrefs = 1

[FortyTwoFortyTwo]

I figured it'd be best to stay on the safe side in case more specialized code takes place versus releasing it using ReleaseValue.

I don't think there a difference between it? Looking at cstrike leaked code it should follow the exact same steps. Although ReleaseScope have extra steps and that games may have handled it differently, so it may makes sense in the long term.

I haven't tested in other games so ReleaseScript's offsets in "#default" is just a guess. For TF2 specifically, I'm not sure if I should've used ExtraOffsets.

TF2's extra offset is above these script offsets, so it fine as it matches with CSGO's offsets.

[FortyTwoFortyTwo]

HSCRIPT_RootTable variable can be used as default scope value, to make it more clearer that root table is used as default.

[FortyTwoFortyTwo]

Offset looks correct, but now there duplicate offsets under same name

[KitRifty]

Should both the CompileScript and ReleaseScript offsets be used in "#default" instead? I put these for TF2 specifically because I wasn't sure if they're the same for CSGO (which I'm assuming is the game that "#default" is based on).

[FortyTwoFortyTwo]

Yeah put in #default, TF2 will use default offsets but auto-adjusts its based on ExtraOffsets

[FortyTwoFortyTwo]

Would prefer to have methodmap function HSCRIPT.ReleaseScript() to match with HSCRIPT.Release()

[FortyTwoFortyTwo]

Thanks!