lol thanks for explaining to me what TCP is. Already knew that before
making this thread... just didn't know the transport ACKs weren't
accessible from application layer (especially after reading that
[fixed] misleading documentation).
But how can you say:
a) TCP ACKs can't be used for application
Hi,
On Tuesday 11 September 2012 06:40:23 d3fault wrote:
> >From this thread I've learned: It's useless for an application layer
>
> to receive transport layer acks... but from that we can now conclude
> that the transport ack is mostly* worthless in any case where the
> application layer protoco
On Tuesday 11 September 2012 01:48:08 Constantin Makshin wrote:
> TCP's 16-bit checksum isn't [very] reliable by today's standards, so doing
> additional integrity checks at application level is not necessarily a bad
> idea (in situations where correctness of the transmitted data is REALLY
> import
Just discovered that there is another entitlement required for printing and
print preview
com.apple.security.print
Raul
On 31.07.2012, at 22:15, Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
> Am 31.07.12 20:16, schrieb Till Oliver Knoll:
>> Am 30.07.12 21:31, schrieb noru...@me.com:
>>> Does QFi
On Sep 11, 2012, at 7:49 AM, ext helfertho...@free.fr
wrote:
> I am trying to filter mouse event send to a QTextEdit. I could easily handle
> event associated with the right button, but have some trouble with the left
> one : when clicking on the QTextEdit, I receive an QEvent of type 199
> (R
Hi, my name is Helfer Thomas and I am using Qt for a free time project. I am
french and apologies for my poor english
I already described my issue on the qt forum without any reply, so I hope to
have better chance on this mailing list.
http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/20144/
I am trying
Am 11.09.2012 um 06:40 schrieb d3fault :
>> From this thread I've learned: It's useless for an application layer
> to receive transport layer acks... but from that we can now conclude
> that the transport ack is mostly* worthless ...
>
> * = clean connect/disconnect + packet re-ordering aside --
>From this thread I've learned: It's useless for an application layer
to receive transport layer acks... but from that we can now conclude
that the transport ack is mostly* worthless in any case where the
application layer protocol takes care of ack'ing. Might as well use
UDP.
* = clean connect/di
On terça-feira, 11 de setembro de 2012 03.48.08, Constantin Makshin wrote:
> TCP's 16-bit checksum isn't [very] reliable by today's standards, so doing
Why do you say that?
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
Intel S
TCP's 16-bit checksum isn't [very] reliable by today's standards, so doing
additional integrity checks at application level is not necessarily a bad
idea (in situations where correctness of the transmitted data is REALLY
important/critical).
On Sep 10, 2012 11:43 PM, "Konrad Rosenbaum" wrote:
> *
Hi,
let's cut it short and come back to your problem.
On Sunday 09 September 2012 20:54:09 d3fault wrote:
> Haha, funny. Reliable doesn't mean reliable. Who knew...
No it is just a different kind of reliable.
TCP reliable: TCP guarantees that you have a stream. Bytes arrive at the
application
Hello all,
The assimp plugin is not yet supported on mips platform--
qt3d/3rdparty/assimp/include/aiDefines.h throws an unsupported platform
error.
On Qt5-Alpha, I used to remove assimp from qt3d/src/plugins/sceneformats/
sceneformats.pro and build qt3d module.
However on Qt5-Beta1 released a fe
On segunda-feira, 10 de setembro de 2012 14.53.31, Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
> > If TCP is reliable by doing ACKs, why the hell would you need to track
> > ACKs
> > too?
>
> Because, since that information is around anyway, why not use it (apart from
> that it seems not accessible in real world imp
Am 10.09.2012 um 13:36 schrieb Thiago Macieira :
> On segunda-feira, 10 de setembro de 2012 13.33.24, Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
>> Am 10.09.2012 um 13:19 schrieb Thiago Macieira :
>>> ...
>>> It's a layering violation for the Application layer to depend on how the
>>> Transport layer works. As I po
On Sep 10, 2012 4:37 AM, "Thiago Macieira"
wrote:
>
> On segunda-feira, 10 de setembro de 2012 13.33.24, Till Oliver Knoll
wrote:
> > Am 10.09.2012 um 13:19 schrieb Thiago Macieira <
thiago.macie...@intel.com>:
> > > ...
> > > It's a layering violation for the Application layer to depend on how
th
On segunda-feira, 10 de setembro de 2012 13.33.24, Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
> Am 10.09.2012 um 13:19 schrieb Thiago Macieira :
> > ...
> > It's a layering violation for the Application layer to depend on how the
> > Transport layer works. As I pointed out, the Transport layer may deliver
> > the by
Am 10.09.2012 um 13:19 schrieb Thiago Macieira :
> ...
> It's a layering violation for the Application layer to depend on how the
> Transport layer works. As I pointed out, the Transport layer may deliver the
> bytes and even ACK them, but the Application layer above may never receive
> them, f
On 10 September 2012 11:19, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>
>
> There's simply no way to get the number of bytes ACK'ed from the other side. I
> did search the Linux TCP API yesterday and I couldn't find anything suitable.
> And even if there were such a way, the ACK information is useless, since the
> a
On segunda-feira, 10 de setembro de 2012 12.54.50, Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
> Then it is about time that the Qt docs be corrected:
>
> "The bytesWritten() signal is emitted when data has been written to the
> socket (i.e., when the client has read the data)."
>
> With emphasis on "the client has
Am 10.09.2012 um 12:19 schrieb Thiago Macieira :
> On segunda-feira, 10 de setembro de 2012 12.02.38, Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
>> Am 09.09.2012 um 21:17 schrieb Justin Karneges :
>>> You're correct in that it is reliable under the hood. The problem is
>>> really
>>> just that most TCP APIs don't e
On segunda-feira, 10 de setembro de 2012 12.02.38, Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
> Am 09.09.2012 um 21:17 schrieb Justin Karneges :
> > You're correct in that it is reliable under the hood. The problem is
> > really
> > just that most TCP APIs don't expose to the app what has been
> > acknowledged.
>
>
Am 09.09.2012 um 21:17 schrieb Justin Karneges :
> You're correct in that it is reliable under the hood. The problem is really
> just that most TCP APIs don't expose to the app what has been acknowledged.
Not entirely true: on a "socket level" you get the number of bytes which have
been ACK'ed
Am 09.09.2012 um 20:01 schrieb d3fault :
> ...
>
> A random guess: does bytesWritten() get triggered by a TCP ACK sent by
> the _receiver's_ internal buffer (regardless of whether my code has
> read it in or not yet (if I just ignore the readyRead()))?
Yes! There was one time when our professor
23 matches
Mail list logo
