🚀 go-pugleaf

Ross Ridge <ross@zooid.guild.org> writes:

> anton@analsyn.gts.org (Anton J Aylward) writes:
> >"Better" for what, under what circumstances?
> 
> All circumstances that I know of.  I don't think g protocol even has an
> advantage over Zmodem on noisy lines.  

   Actually, that depends... if you're speaking at a low baud rate (less than 
2400 bps) and are forced to accept many stages of buffering between systems, a 
ZMODEM zrpos (resend from byte <n>) may have to wait in queue behind data that 
will be thrown away when the zrpos signal arrives.  UUCP-g, at least, limits 
the damage to 216 bytes (3 packet window) or 504 bytes (7 packet window). 

   DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying that this is common, only that there are 
circumstances where UUCP-g might produce better throughput than ZMODEM.

> Spare me your dumb philosophy.

   Not only is Anton's objection about absolutes correct (if not very 
significant in this case), but this response comes accross as more rude than I 
believe you intended. 

Geoffrey Welsh, 7 Strath Humber Court, Islington, Ontario, M9A 4C8 Canada
geoff@zswamp.uucp, [xenitec.on.ca|m2xenix.psg.com]!zswamp!geoff (416)258-8467
         Coincidentally, most people who fight for "fairness" would be
         significantly better off under the system they call "fair"...