In industrial scenarios, it is necessary to increase the processing of special data structures such as union and bit fields.

[wancy-x]

At present, there is a very common data structure as follows:

typedef struct
{
	union
	{
		unsigned short word;
		struct
		{
			unsigned code1		:3;
			unsigned code2		:5;
			unsigned code3		:2;
			unsigned code4		:6;
		}block;
	}order;
	...
}

In order to be compatible with a large number of early module codes, this is a necessary data structure, and this data structure will be transmitted with high-level programming languages.

After careful study, the conclusion is that under the current use scenario, the union cannot be serialized in general, but can only be parsed in a targeted way. In consideration of the universality of Jstruct, it is recommended to negotiate the special data types that may be encountered at present and in the future.

[wancy-x]

When processing this type of data, it is also necessary to consider the problem of big-endian and little-endian, which may cause dislocation in the transmission process of different 'arch'.

[hanhui03]

I don't recommend doing this, jstruct just provides serialization and deserialization for json, I want to keep it simpl, not to understand the meaning inside the protocol, this work should be do by protocol parsing.

[wancy-x]

In fact, the union should be an extension of the base data type, but the data defined by the union cannot be parsed according to the original logic, so the protocol is proposed. Do you think the extension of union should not be parsed or the description of protocol is inappropriate? If it is the latter, I will put the protocol in other files and extend the jstruct in the form of modules.