I have a group of different messages that come in as JSON and can be distinguished based on a single field, but then each variant has a different collection of secondary fields:
#[derive(Debug, Serialize, Deserialize)]
struct MessageOne {
///op will always be "one"
op: String,
x: f64,
y: f64,
}
#[derive(Debug, Serialize, Deserialize)]
struct MessageTwo {
///op will always be "two"
op: String,
a: f64,
b: i64,
}
The different message types are routed to different processing functions (e.g. process_message_one
, process_message_two
, etc). Is there an elegant or idiomatic way to automatically select the correct message sub-type? Currently I've defined a generic message:
#[derive(Debug, Serialize, Deserialize)]
struct MessageGeneric {
op: String,
}
then parse the incoming JSON into the MessageGeneric
, read the op
field and then deserialize again, matching on op
to select the correct message type. Full example:
#![allow(unused)]
extern crate serde; // 1.0.78
extern crate serde_json; // 1.0.27
#[macro_use]
extern crate serde_derive;
use std::collections::HashMap;
#[derive(Debug, Serialize, Deserialize)]
struct MessageGeneric {
op: String,
}
#[derive(Debug, Serialize, Deserialize)]
struct MessageOne {
///op will always be "one"
op: String,
x: f64,
y: f64,
}
#[derive(Debug, Serialize, Deserialize)]
struct MessageTwo {
///op will always be "two"
op: String,
a: f64,
b: f64,
}
fn process_message_one(m: &MessageOne) {
println!("Processing a MessageOne: {:?}", m);
}
fn process_message_two(m: &MessageTwo) {
println!("Processing a MessageTwo: {:?}", m);
}
fn main() {
let data = r#"{
"op": "one",
"x": 1.0,
"y": 2.0
}"#;
let z: MessageGeneric = serde_json::from_str(data).unwrap();
match z.op.as_ref() {
"one" => {
let zp: MessageOne = serde_json::from_str(data).unwrap();
process_message_one(&zp);
},
"two" => {
let zp: MessageTwo = serde_json::from_str(data).unwrap();
process_message_two(&zp);
},
_ => println!("Unknown Message Type")
}
}
I've seen Serde's enum representations but it was unclear to me if/how that would be applied in this case. The messages coming in are defined by an external API, so I can't control their content beyond knowing what the variants are.
There is no point to keep "one" or "two" in your structure
MessageOne
andMessageTwo
: if you have constructed this structure you already know if it is message one or message two.