From: tmoran@acm.org
Subject: Re: More details on:--- ADA vs JAVA sockets---
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 20:16:22 GMT
Date: 2004-01-08T20:16:22+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <qUiLb.782498$Tr4.2238587@attbi_s03> (raw)
In-Reply-To: btj4ha$pii$1@e3k.asi.ansaldo.it
>The possibility of loss due to UDP (I believe) is not the case ...
An easy test would be to insert delays to artificially slow down the
transmitting side.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-08 20:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-07 8:39 ADA vs JAVA sockets Riccardo
2004-01-07 13:31 ` Duncan Sands
2004-01-07 16:28 ` Jano
2004-01-07 19:44 ` Pascal Obry
2004-01-07 21:11 ` Duncan Sands
2004-01-08 14:31 ` Gnat 3.15p bugs (was: ADA vs JAVA sockets) Jano
2004-01-08 16:24 ` Duncan Sands
2004-01-08 19:14 ` Jano
2004-01-08 20:16 ` tmoran
2004-01-08 20:58 ` Duncan Sands
2004-01-07 14:24 ` ADA vs JAVA sockets Stephen Leake
2004-01-07 15:43 ` Steve
2004-01-07 22:23 ` Frode Tennebø
2004-01-08 7:09 ` David Marceau
2004-01-08 8:32 ` More details on:--- ADA vs JAVA sockets--- Riccardo
2004-01-08 20:16 ` tmoran [this message]
2004-01-09 7:27 ` Riccardo
2004-01-09 8:45 ` Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen
2004-01-09 10:27 ` thanks Riccardo
2004-01-09 13:58 ` thanks Robert Spooner
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox