First of all the Boolean type is said to have a default marshal type of a four-byte value. So the following code works:

```
    struct A 
    { 
        public bool bValue1; 
        public int iValue2; 
    }
    struct B 
    { 
        public int iValue1;
        public bool bValue2; 
    }
    public static void Main()
    {
        int[] rawvalues = new int[] { 2, 4 };

        A a = (A)Marshal.PtrToStructure(GCHandle.Alloc(rawvalues, GCHandleType.Pinned).AddrOfPinnedObject(), typeof(A));
        Assert.IsTrue(a.bValue1 == true);
        Assert.IsTrue(a.iValue2 == 4);
        B b = (B)Marshal.PtrToStructure(GCHandle.Alloc(rawvalues, GCHandleType.Pinned).AddrOfPinnedObject(), typeof(B));
        Assert.IsTrue(b.iValue1 == 2);
        Assert.IsTrue(b.bValue2 == true);
    }

```

Clearly these structures marshal independently just fine. The values are translated as expected. However, when we combine these structures into a "union" by declaring LayoutKind.Explicit like this:

```
    [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Explicit)]
    struct Broken
    {
        [FieldOffset(0)]
        public A a;
        [FieldOffset(0)]
        public B b;
    }

```

We suddenly find ourselves unable to correctly marshal these types. Here is the test code for the above structure and how it fails:

```
        int[] rawvalues = new int[] { 2, 4 };
        Broken broken = (Broken)Marshal.PtrToStructure(GCHandle.Alloc(rawvalues, GCHandleType.Pinned).AddrOfPinnedObject(), typeof(Broken));

        Assert.IsTrue(broken.a.bValue1 != false);// pass, not false
        Assert.IsTrue(broken.a.bValue1 == true);// pass, must be true?
        Assert.IsTrue(true.Equals(broken.a.bValue1));// FAILS, WOW, WTF?
        Assert.IsTrue(broken.a.iValue2 == 4);// FAILS, a.iValue1 == 1, What happened to 4?
        Assert.IsTrue(broken.b.iValue1 == 2);// pass
        Assert.IsTrue(broken.b.bValue2 == true);// pass

```

It's very humorous to see this express as true: (a.bValue1 != false && a.bValue1 == true && !true.Equals(a.bValue1))

Of course the bigger problem here is that a.iValue2 != 4, rather the 4 has been changed to 1 (presumably by the overlapped bool). 

**So the question: Is this a bug, or just failed as designed?**

Background: this came from  [[What is the difference between structures containing bool vs uint when using PInvoke?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1602899)](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1602899)

Update: This is even stranger when you use large integer values (> 255) as only the byte that is used for the boolean is being modified to a 1, thus changing 0x0f00 to 0x0f01 for the b.bValue2. For a.bValue1 above it's not translated at all and 0x0f00 provides a false value for a.bValue1.

Update #2:

The most obvious and reasonable solution to the above issue(s) is to use a uint for the marshalling and expose boolean properties instead. Really solving the issue with a 'workaround' is not at question. I'm mostly wondering is this a bug or is this the behavior you would expect?

```
    struct A 
    { 
        private uint _bValue1;
        public bool bValue1 { get { return _bValue1 != 0; } } 
        public int iValue2; 
    }
    struct B 
    { 
        public int iValue1;
        private uint _bValue2;
        public bool bValue2 { get { return _bValue2 != 0; } } 
    }

```