Rob Bloodgood wrote:
>
> > > Why do SyncStreams exist, and what commonly uses them? I tried google
> > > searches for "syncstream" and "syncblock", but they didn't return
> > > anything that looked useful. Do SyncStreams have a more common name?
> >
> > Invented by me. Name made by me. (Hence the lack of google mentions.)
> > The use is for situations where two hosts are communicating over a
> > persistent link (eg: in some of my own stuff I'm making) where you want
> > the link to stay up even if the occaisional packet gets trashed. If a
> > message is garbled to the extent that it gives a wrong length etc, the
> > system will try to read it, fail, slurp data up to the next
> > synchronzation byte, and pick up the stream again.
>
> Uhh... for a *NON* TCP connection, right? You're thinking in terms of UDP
> or serial, right?
Yes
Basically for UDP. For example streaming style approaches where you want
to flood the line one way and not have to worry about acks.
