Scripting via IronPython

[InsomniacPro]

So now, I'm pretty sure, approx 99.2% affirmative that I have ironpython setup correctly. Now when I utilize this code.

                    var Test = scope.GetVariable<Func<GameClient, ushort, int>>("npc");
                    Test(Client, option);
                    runtime.Shutdown();

I'll get the error


Now, has anyone come across this error?
I'm pretty new to IronPython, so please bear with me.

Thanks for any help.

[Aceking]

Can't say I have ever scripted with iron python.

But judging from the error, try:

    var Test = scope.GetVariable<Func<GameClient, short, int>>("npc");

[InsomniacPro]

Originally Posted by Aceking

Can't say I have ever scripted with iron python.

But judging from the error, try:

    var Test = scope.GetVariable<Func<GameClient, short, int>>("npc");

I've tried all data types. No luck.

[abdoumatrix]

just stupid question

why u use ironpython for npcscripting?

i would go with a similar script engine like

's one.

[InsomniacPro]

Originally Posted by abdoumatrix

just stupid question

why u use ironpython for npcscripting?

i would go with a similar script engine like

's one.

I can ask the same question to the OP of that source as to why he didn't use IronPython.

[SteveRambo]

It seems like a bug in your Python script

[Y u k i]

Originally Posted by abdoumatrix

just stupid question

why u use ironpython for npcscripting?

i would go with a similar script engine like

's one.

Probably because apple pie isn't as tasty as strawberry ice.

[-impulse-]

Originally Posted by InsomniacPro

I can ask the same question to the OP of that source as to why he didn't use IronPython.

Why use ProjectX's scripting engine?
1. You can script in C#/VB
2. The scripts are compiled to IL and loaded only once (although, by the looks of it, Super Aids has implemented, but does not use [might use a command or something for that too], something that reloads the scripts)
3. The scope of the script is handled by .net (that is if the script is loaded in the same AppDomain)
4. Once a script is compiled and the method info is kept in a dictionary using it would be like invoking any function using Delegate.Invoke.

Why not to use it as is:
1. Reloading one script would require copying the contents of all the existing scripts into one file, then compile it, to update all preloaded scripts.
2. When you write a script, the method name will have to follow C#'s/VB's guidelines regarding the method name, so you can't use something like script_1-100,200-400(...) to avoid making 299 files for the same function.

Why use IronPython?
1. If you love/want to learn Python, you will obviously want to use IronPython.
2. It's an easy scripting language which provides lots of features

Why not use IronPython?
1. The scope is handled by you by setting variables.
2. Writing scripts with IronPython can be tricky if you want to use .net libraries or w/e without auto completition (although it is possible with Wing [maybe with others too?], as I was just reading).

I don't use Python much so I couldn't find more reason as to why to use or why not to use it. Although if you're interested into performance, using compiled C#/VB scripts is faster.

[InsomniacPro]

Originally Posted by -impulse-

Why use ProjectX's scripting engine?
1. You can script in C#/VB
2. The scripts are compiled to IL and loaded only once (although, by the looks of it, Super Aids has implemented, but does not use [might use a command or something for that too], something that reloads the scripts)
3. The scope of the script is handled by .net (that is if the script is loaded in the same AppDomain)
4. Once a script is compiled and the method info is kept in a dictionary using it would be like invoking any function using Delegate.Invoke.

Why not to use it as is:
1. Reloading one script would require copying the contents of all the existing scripts into one file, then compile it, to update all preloaded scripts.
2. When you write a script, the method name will have to follow C#'s/VB's guidelines regarding the method name, so you can't use something like script_1-100,200-400(...) to avoid making 299 files for the same function.

Why use IronPython?
1. If you love/want to learn Python, you will obviously want to use IronPython.
2. It's an easy scripting language which provides lots of features

Why not use IronPython?
1. The scope is handled by you by setting variables.
2. Writing scripts with IronPython can be tricky if you want to use .net libraries or w/e without auto completition (although it is possible with Wing [maybe with others too?], as I was just reading).

I don't use Python much so I couldn't find more reason as to why to use or why not to use it. Although if you're interested into performance, using compiled C#/VB scripts is faster.

Well, after reading this, and doing my own personal research ofc, I guess I will go along the lines of what Jacob made and do all that. Keeping C# syntax is a big deal to me, so thanks Alex.

[Super Aids]

Originally Posted by -impulse-

Why use ProjectX's scripting engine?
1. You can script in C#/VB
2. The scripts are compiled to IL and loaded only once (although, by the looks of it, Super Aids has implemented, but does not use [might use a command or something for that too], something that reloads the scripts)
3. The scope of the script is handled by .net (that is if the script is loaded in the same AppDomain)
4. Once a script is compiled and the method info is kept in a dictionary using it would be like invoking any function using Delegate.Invoke.

Why not to use it as is:
1. Reloading one script would require copying the contents of all the existing scripts into one file, then compile it, to update all preloaded scripts.
2. When you write a script, the method name will have to follow C#'s/VB's guidelines regarding the method name, so you can't use something like script_1-100,200-400(...) to avoid making 299 files for the same function.

Why use IronPython?
1. If you love/want to learn Python, you will obviously want to use IronPython.
2. It's an easy scripting language which provides lots of features

Why not use IronPython?
1. The scope is handled by you by setting variables.
2. Writing scripts with IronPython can be tricky if you want to use .net libraries or w/e without auto completition (although it is possible with Wing [maybe with others too?], as I was just reading).

I don't use Python much so I couldn't find more reason as to why to use or why not to use it. Although if you're interested into performance, using compiled C#/VB scripts is faster.

What I did for the reload was using FileSystemWatcher.

I did some heavy optimization and changes to it when I worked on coding for Insomnius. Since I used it to implement dynamic events so lots of features could be edited/added at runtime like tournaments, commands, playerdebugging, time specific actions etc.

Imma see if I can find it, in case it would be necessary else I might just rewrite the engine from that source.

[KraHen]

Originally Posted by -impulse-

Why use ProjectX's scripting engine?
I don't use Python much so I couldn't find more reason as to why to use or why not to use it. Although if you're interested into performance, using compiled C#/VB scripts is faster.

Nope. IronPython can be compiled as well, and stored into the memory. It`s not a matter of performance, it`s a matter of preference (and maybe compile speed as well. I personally would suggest to everyone who wants to implement a scripting engine to go with what he/she or the other devs are more confortable with, the minimal performance differences(that is, if you handle everything correctly in the parser/whatever) don`t count as much here as the productivity rate.

On the other side, wb bro, haven`t seem you for some time now.

[-impulse-]

Originally Posted by KraHen

Nope. IronPython can be compiled as well, and stored into the memory. It`s not a matter of performance, it`s a matter of preference (and maybe compile speed as well. I personally would suggest to everyone who wants to implement a scripting engine to go with what he/she or the other devs are more confortable with, the minimal performance differences(that is, if you handle everything correctly in the parser/whatever) don`t count as much here as the productivity rate.

On the other side, wb bro, haven`t seem you for some time now.

Uhm, no. Because even if python is compiled, it is still is interpreted 2 times. First from the pyc and then as IL compared to C#/VB where it's only IL.

There's a lot of threads on this topic, one of which is:

The opinions vary, but at balance C# > IronPython.

Anyway, I am not sure how debugging would go... With C# I can generate a pdb in memory and have a full stacktrace whenever an exception appears. With IronPython the errors look weird...

I've been around. I am always skulking in the shadows.

[{ Angelius }]

PHP Code:

using System.CodeDom.Compiler;

public class ScriptEngine
{
    private static CodeDomProvider Provider = CodeDomProvider.CreateProvider("CSharp");
    public static CompilerResults Compile(string Code, CompilerParameters Parameters)
    {
        Parameters.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().Location);
        Parameters.CompilerOptions = "/t:library";
        Parameters.GenerateInMemory = true;
        CompilerResults cr = Provider.CompileAssemblyFromSource(Parameters, Code);
        if (cr.Errors.Count > 0)
        {
            //Error out
            return null;
        }
        return cr;
    }
} 


Ideas ?

[KraHen]

Originally Posted by -impulse-

Uhm, no. Because even if python is compiled, it is still is interpreted 2 times. First from the pyc and then as IL compared to C#/VB where it's only IL.

There's a lot of threads on this topic, one of which is:

The opinions vary, but at balance C# > IronPython.

Anyway, I am not sure how debugging would go... With C# I can generate a pdb in memory and have a full stacktrace whenever an exception appears. With IronPython the errors look weird...

I've been around. I am always skulking in the shadows.

2 times for this amount of scripts is still not a problem, not even with 2k+ players, the same method is used with LUA in commercial games and it works wonders.

Anyhow, debugging is easy, with PTVS it gets really easy (also, you can debug standard python as well).

[-impulse-]

Originally Posted by { Angelius }

PHP Code:

using System.CodeDom.Compiler;

public class ScriptEngine
{
    private static CodeDomProvider Provider = CodeDomProvider.CreateProvider("CSharp");
    public static CompilerResults Compile(string Code, CompilerParameters Parameters)
    {
        Parameters.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().Location);
        Parameters.CompilerOptions = "/t:library";
        Parameters.GenerateInMemory = true;
        CompilerResults cr = Provider.CompileAssemblyFromSource(Parameters, Code);
        if (cr.Errors.Count > 0)
        {
            //Error out
            return null;
        }
        return cr;
    }
} 


Ideas ?

This is what I use to compile and extract only the method I require from a script:

 Spoiler

PHP Code:

public class ScriptBase
    {
        protected MethodInfo _method;
        protected string _path;
        
        private static CSharpCodeProvider codeProvider;
        private CompilerParameters compilerParameters;

        public static void Init()
        {
            codeProvider = new CSharpCodeProvider();
        }
        private void init()
        {
            compilerParameters = new CompilerParameters(new string[] { "System.dll", "CoEmuLibrary.dll", "SystemExtensions.dll", "System.Core.dll" });
            compilerParameters.GenerateInMemory = !(compilerParameters.GenerateExecutable = false);
            compilerParameters.CompilerOptions = "/unsafe";
            compilerParameters.IncludeDebugInformation = true;
        }

        public ScriptBase(string fileName)
        {
            _path = fileName;
        }

        protected bool Compile()
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Compiling script {0}.", _path);
            init();
            CompilerResults results = codeProvider.CompileAssemblyFromSource(compilerParameters, File.ReadAllText(_path));
            if (results.Errors.HasErrors)
            {
                Console.WriteLine("Error in file: {0}", _path);
                foreach (var error in results.Errors)
                    Console.WriteLine(error.ToString());
                Debug.Fail(string.Concat("Failed to compile ", _path));
                return false;
            }
            else
            {
                var assembly = results.CompiledAssembly;
                
                if (results.Errors.Count == 0)
                    return processAssembly(assembly);
                else
                    return false;
            }
        }

        private bool processAssembly(Assembly assembly)
        {
            Type classType = assembly.GetType("Main");
            if (classType == null) return false;
            MethodInfo method = classType.GetMethod("Execute", BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.Public);
            if (method == null) return false;
            _method = method;
            return true;
        }
    } 


To be able to compile in parallel you have to use a different object of CompilerParameters (because the compiler parameters generates only one random temp file name, when it's constructed, not when you do the actual compiling).

My scripts look something like:

PHP Code:

using System;
using CoEmuLibrary;
using CoEmuLibrary.Packets;

class Main
{
    public static unsafe void Execute(Item item, IGameClient client)
    //public static unsafe void Execute(IntPtr ptr, IGameClient client) // for handling pointers to packets or w/e
    {
    }
}