Embedding a Scripting Language in the MUD Server - wwestlake/Labyrinth GitHub Wiki

Embedding a Scripting Language in a C# Web API (.NET 8 Core)

Overview

Embedding a scripting language into your C# Web API can empower administrators and owners to automate tasks, extend game functionality, and customize behavior without needing to alter the core application code. This document evaluates various scripting languages that can be embedded within a .NET 8 Core Web API and discusses the trade-offs associated with each option.

Criteria for Evaluation

  1. Ease of Embedding: How straightforward it is to integrate the language into a .NET 8 Core Web API.
  2. Performance: The runtime efficiency of the embedded language and its impact on the server's performance.
  3. Security: The ability to sandbox and secure scripts to prevent malicious code execution.
  4. Extensibility: How easily the language can interface with the API’s C# code and internal logic.
  5. Community and Support: The availability of resources, libraries, and community support for the language.
  6. Learning Curve: How easy it is for admins and owners to learn and use the language.
  7. Maintenance: The long-term maintainability of the language within the project.

Language Options

1. C# Scripting (Roslyn Scripting API)

Overview

C# scripting allows for dynamic execution of C# code within the application using the Roslyn Scripting API. This approach leverages the existing C# knowledge of developers and integrates seamlessly with .NET Core.

Pros

  • Ease of Embedding: Natively supported in .NET with the Roslyn compiler, making integration straightforward.
  • Performance: High performance due to direct execution within the .NET runtime.
  • Security: Can be sandboxed to restrict script permissions and access to certain APIs.
  • Extensibility: Fully compatible with existing C# code and libraries, allowing extensive use of the existing API.
  • Learning Curve: No new language to learn; uses the same C# syntax familiar to developers.
  • Community and Support: Strong support from the .NET community and extensive documentation.

Cons

  • Sandboxing Complexity: Requires careful setup to securely sandbox scripts, especially to prevent malicious use.
  • Verbosity: C# can be verbose for simple scripting tasks, which might be a drawback for quick and dirty scripts.

2. IronPython

Overview

IronPython is an implementation of the Python programming language running on the .NET framework. It allows embedding Python scripts within a .NET application.

Pros

  • Ease of Embedding: Integrates well with .NET and can call into C# code easily.
  • Extensibility: Python’s dynamic nature and extensive libraries can be utilized alongside .NET functionality.
  • Community and Support: Python has a large user base, and IronPython is supported by the .NET community.
  • Learning Curve: Python is known for its simplicity and readability, making it accessible for non-developers.

Cons

  • Performance: Generally slower than native C# execution due to Python’s interpreted nature.
  • Security: More complex to sandbox securely than native .NET languages.
  • IronPython Maintenance: IronPython is not as actively maintained as other .NET languages, which might pose long-term risks.

3. PowerShell

Overview

PowerShell is a scripting language developed by Microsoft, widely used for task automation and configuration management. It runs on the .NET runtime, making it a candidate for embedding within a .NET application.

Pros

  • Ease of Embedding: Native to the .NET ecosystem and integrates smoothly with C#.
  • Extensibility: Can leverage .NET libraries and interact with the API’s objects and methods.
  • Community and Support: Strong support and extensive resources available due to its widespread use in the Microsoft ecosystem.
  • Learning Curve: Familiar to admins and IT professionals, particularly those with experience in system administration.

Cons

  • Performance: Slower than native C# due to its scripting nature.
  • Security: Requires robust sandboxing to prevent potentially destructive scripts from running.
  • Verbosity: Can be complex for non-administrative scripting, particularly for those unfamiliar with its command syntax.

4. Custom DSL (Domain-Specific Language)

Overview

A custom Domain-Specific Language (DSL) can be designed specifically for the MUD, tailored to the needs of admins and owners for scripting and automation.

Pros

  • Performance: Can be optimized for specific server tasks, potentially offering better performance than general-purpose languages.
  • Security: Full control over the language allows for rigorous security measures and a restrictive execution environment.
  • Extensibility: The DSL can be designed to integrate tightly with the MUD’s API and logic, including built-in commands for common tasks.
  • Tailored Features: Can be designed to include exactly what is needed for the MUD, without unnecessary complexity.

Cons

  • Development Time: Creating and maintaining a custom language is resource-intensive.
  • Maintenance: Requires ongoing maintenance and updates as the MUD evolves.
  • Learning Curve: Admins and owners would need to learn a new, custom language.
  • Community and Support: No external community or libraries; everything must be built and supported in-house.

Conclusion

Recommended Choice: C# Scripting (Roslyn Scripting API)

For a C# Web API in .NET 8 Core, C# scripting with the Roslyn API is the most suitable option. It offers seamless integration with the existing codebase, high performance, and a minimal learning curve for your team. While security and sandboxing need to be carefully implemented, the benefits of using a language that is already deeply integrated with your technology stack outweigh the complexities.

Alternative: IronPython

If a more dynamic language is desired, IronPython is a viable alternative, especially if Python's simplicity and extensive libraries are appealing. However, the potential trade-offs in performance and the complexities of secure sandboxing should be carefully considered.

Considerations for a Custom DSL

While a custom DSL offers complete control and optimization, it involves significant development and maintenance overhead. This approach is best suited for scenarios where specific requirements cannot be met by existing languages or where a highly tailored scripting environment is needed.

Further Considerations

  • Sandboxing: Regardless of the chosen language, security is a critical concern. Proper sandboxing must be implemented to prevent unauthorized access to the server’s internals.
  • Documentation and Training: Comprehensive documentation and training materials should be provided to ensure that admins and owners can effectively use the scripting capabilities.
  • Plugin Architecture: Consider implementing a plugin architecture to manage scripts and extensions, allowing for easier updates and maintenance of the embedded language environment.

This trade study provides a framework for deciding on the best scripting language to embed within your .NET 8 Core Web API, aligning with your project’s goals and long-term maintainability.