Asp Forum - c# dealing with c++ dll - microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.interop

jerome.dapot@voila.fr

1/31/2007 5:09:00 PM

I try to use a c++ dll in c#. The dll is call by myfct(char* param) is
it possible to retreive in c# the new value of param witch has been
modified by the function call

10 Answers

(Mattias Sjögren)

1/31/2007 7:50:00 PM

>I try to use a c++ dll in c#. The dll is call by myfct(char* param) is
>it possible to retreive in c# the new value of param witch has been
>modified by the function call

Yes, if you use StringBuilder (for text) or byte[] (for binary data)
as the parameter type.

Mattias

--
Mattias Sjögren [C# MVP] mattias @ mvps.org
http://www.msjogren.n... | http://www.dotneti...
Please reply only to the newsgroup.

jerome.dapot@voila.fr

2/1/2007 8:20:00 AM

thanks for your reply

John Galt

6/18/2008 10:22:00 PM

<wismel@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3rni54h6vp4pkbmcfv71a23gu9da6ptai7@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:22:55 -0700, "MioMyo"
> <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:
>
>>But the Imperial Princess Pelosi and Obstructionist Democraps in Congress
>>are Brought and Paid Whores to the Hate-America ENVIRONMENTAL
>>LOBBYISTS.....
>>
>>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/67_support_offshore_drilling_64_expect_it_will_lo...
>>
>>Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United States
>>and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John McCain has
>>announced
>>his support for states that want to explore for oil and gas off their
>>coasts.
>>
>>A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey-conducted before McCain announced
>>his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters believe that
>>drilling
>>should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other states.
>>Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and moderate voters
>>strongly support this approach, while liberals are more evenly divided
>>(46%
>>of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose).
>>
>>Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe it is at least somewhat likely
>>that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is allowed, although
>>27% don't believe it. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of conservatives say
>>offshore drilling is at least somewhat likely to drive prices down. That
>>view is shared by 57% of moderates and 50% of liberal voters.
>>
>>Nearly all voters are worried about rising gas and energy prices, with 79%
>>very concerned and 16% somewhat concerned.
>>
>>McCain is expected to formally call today (Tuesday) for the lifting of the
>>federal moratorium on states being allowed to explore off their coasts for
>>oil and gas deposits. While acknowledging it is only a short-term
>>response,
>>he has described it as a good first step toward reducing U.S. energy
>>dependence on overseas sources.
>>
>>The Outer Continental Shelf moratorium, passed in 1981, bans exploration
>>for
>>offshore natural gas and oil deposits. Barack Obama, McCain's opponent for
>>the White House, voted against an effort to lift the ban last year in the
>>Senate. He argued that it was only a short-term solution. National
>>Democratic Party leaders and most environmental organizations for years
>>have
>>strongly opposed efforts to explore for oil off the coast of the U.S.
>>
>>According to the new survey, 85% of Republicans are in favor of offshore
>>drilling as opposed to 57% of Democrats and 60% of unaffiliated voters.
>>Those who call themselves conservatives favor such drilling 84% to 46% of
>>liberals and 59% of self-designated moderates.
>>
>>African-American voters are less supportive of such drilling than whites -
>>58% to 71%.
>>
>>Women are more skeptical than men about the impact such drilling will have
>>on gas prices: Nearly one out of three male voters (32%) say prices are
>>very
>>likely to go down, a view shared by only 23% of women.
>>
>>Four out of five Republicans (79%) think prices are likely to fall thanks
>>to
>>offshore drilling, a view shared by only 55% of Democrats. Sixty percent
>>(60%) of unaffiliated voters expect it to happen.
>>
>>Voters also believe 61% to 22% that oil companies should be required to
>>reinvest at least a portion of their profits into alternative energy
>>research. On this question, liberal and moderate voters are strongly
>>supportive of the proposal while conservatives are more evenly divided
>>(47%
>>of conservatives in favor, 35% opposed)
>>
>>Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new
>>energy
>>sources is the best long-term solution to the nation's energy problem.
>>Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more likely to solve
>>the nation's energy problem than government research programs. But, at the
>>same time, only 52% said companies should be allowed to keep the profits
>>from the discovery of any alternative fuel sources.
>>
> On the flip side Bush & Company are whores for business interests that
> have encouraged the flooding of America by illegal aliens.

What's the opposite of being a "whore for business interests"? Wanting to
shut all businesses down and return to pre-industrial revolution America?

>And they
> really consume energy and public resources. Anything for a quick buck.
> Both whoreish major parties ignore the energy consumption of another 1
> million legal immigrants a year. I hope gas
> reaches at least $6.00 per gallon. Perhaps we can make the relative
> easy switch to electrics, etc. Nothing will happen until the
> gelationous comatose public exhibits some personal energy in demanding
> alternatives.

According to the subject line and the Rasmussen poll, 2/3 of the gelatinous
comatose public is no longer comatose on this issue. They've apparently read
read the articles that consistently discuss that alternatives are AT LEAST
50 years (probably 100) away from providing any sort of substantive
replacement for fossil fuels, intuitively understand that supply and demand
has *not* been suspended vis a vis the energy industry, and would prefer not
being reduced to an agrarian society by no-progress, no-growth political
elements that could give a damn about the average American as long as their
ideologic crotch is getting scratched.

The boobs don't realize that offshore oil is 7 to 10
> years from delivery.

They know it. The also know that the "50" noted above is a lot longer than
"7 to 10", and that the real risk are the boobs that don't understand that
we're "7 to 10" years away from economic destruction should oil continue to
appreciate at even a quarter of the current rate.

Four bucks a gallon and rising due to huge demand growth in China and India.
Huge untapped reserves in oil, oil shale, coal (for coal gasification), and
natural gas.

Fun's over. Time to drill.

JG

r wiley

6/18/2008 11:13:00 PM

<wismel@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3rni54h6vp4pkbmcfv71a23gu9da6ptai7@4ax.com...
>>
> On the flip side Bush & Company are whores for business interests that
> have encouraged the flooding of America by illegal aliens.And they
> really consume energy and public resources. Anything for a quick buck.
> Both whoreish major parties ignore the energy consumption of another 1
> million legal immigrants a year. I hope gas
> reaches at least $6.00 per gallon. Perhaps we can make the relative
> easy switch to electrics, etc. Nothing will happen until the
> gelationous comatose public exhibits some personal energy in demanding
> alternatives. The boobs don't realize that offshore oil is 7 to 10
> years from delivery.
>
> ted

Half the electricity in the USA is produced by burning coal. Can you
say "acid rain".

rw

MioMyo

6/19/2008 1:22:00 AM

<wismel@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3rni54h6vp4pkbmcfv71a23gu9da6ptai7@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:22:55 -0700, "MioMyo"
> <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:
>
>>But the Imperial Princess Pelosi and Obstructionist Democraps in Congress
>>are Brought and Paid Whores to the Hate-America ENVIRONMENTAL
>>LOBBYISTS.....
>>
>>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/67_support_offshore_drilling_64_expect_it_will_lo...
>>
>>Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United States
>>and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John McCain has
>>announced
>>his support for states that want to explore for oil and gas off their
>>coasts.
>>
>>A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey-conducted before McCain announced
>>his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters believe that
>>drilling
>>should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other states.
>>Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and moderate voters
>>strongly support this approach, while liberals are more evenly divided
>>(46%
>>of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose).
>>
>>Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe it is at least somewhat likely
>>that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is allowed, although
>>27% don't believe it. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of conservatives say
>>offshore drilling is at least somewhat likely to drive prices down. That
>>view is shared by 57% of moderates and 50% of liberal voters.
>>
>>Nearly all voters are worried about rising gas and energy prices, with 79%
>>very concerned and 16% somewhat concerned.
>>
>>McCain is expected to formally call today (Tuesday) for the lifting of the
>>federal moratorium on states being allowed to explore off their coasts for
>>oil and gas deposits. While acknowledging it is only a short-term
>>response,
>>he has described it as a good first step toward reducing U.S. energy
>>dependence on overseas sources.
>>
>>The Outer Continental Shelf moratorium, passed in 1981, bans exploration
>>for
>>offshore natural gas and oil deposits. Barack Obama, McCain's opponent for
>>the White House, voted against an effort to lift the ban last year in the
>>Senate. He argued that it was only a short-term solution. National
>>Democratic Party leaders and most environmental organizations for years
>>have
>>strongly opposed efforts to explore for oil off the coast of the U.S.
>>
>>According to the new survey, 85% of Republicans are in favor of offshore
>>drilling as opposed to 57% of Democrats and 60% of unaffiliated voters.
>>Those who call themselves conservatives favor such drilling 84% to 46% of
>>liberals and 59% of self-designated moderates.
>>
>>African-American voters are less supportive of such drilling than whites -
>>58% to 71%.
>>
>>Women are more skeptical than men about the impact such drilling will have
>>on gas prices: Nearly one out of three male voters (32%) say prices are
>>very
>>likely to go down, a view shared by only 23% of women.
>>
>>Four out of five Republicans (79%) think prices are likely to fall thanks
>>to
>>offshore drilling, a view shared by only 55% of Democrats. Sixty percent
>>(60%) of unaffiliated voters expect it to happen.
>>
>>Voters also believe 61% to 22% that oil companies should be required to
>>reinvest at least a portion of their profits into alternative energy
>>research. On this question, liberal and moderate voters are strongly
>>supportive of the proposal while conservatives are more evenly divided
>>(47%
>>of conservatives in favor, 35% opposed)
>>
>>Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new
>>energy
>>sources is the best long-term solution to the nation's energy problem.
>>Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more likely to solve
>>the nation's energy problem than government research programs. But, at the
>>same time, only 52% said companies should be allowed to keep the profits
>>from the discovery of any alternative fuel sources.
>>
> On the flip side Bush & Company are whores for business interests that
> have encouraged the flooding of America by illegal aliens.And they
> really consume energy and public resources. Anything for a quick buck.
> Both whoreish major parties ignore the energy consumption of another 1
> million legal immigrants a year. I hope gas
> reaches at least $6.00 per gallon. Perhaps we can make the relative
> easy switch to electrics, etc. Nothing will happen until the
> gelationous comatose public exhibits some personal energy in demanding
> alternatives. The boobs don't realize that offshore oil is 7 to 10
> years from delivery.
>
> ted

You talk as if alternatives are ready to replace oil today.

They aren't, but thanks for admitting that you want, many in your own party,
to suffer.

I suppose you partake in NOTHING that is a product of oil and/or delivered
via an oil consumption transport system?

If you Talk the Talk, then have the cajonies to Walk the Walk!

MioMyo

6/19/2008 1:23:00 AM

"The Pretzel" <nghotair@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:48596b7e$0$3366$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> wismel@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:22:55 -0700, "MioMyo"
>> <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But the Imperial Princess Pelosi and Obstructionist Democraps in
>>> Congress are Brought and Paid Whores to the Hate-America ENVIRONMENTAL
>>> LOBBYISTS.....
>>>
>>> http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/67_support_offshore_drilling_64_expect_it_will_lo...
>>>
>>> Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United
>>> States and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John McCain
>>> has announced his support for states that want to explore for oil and
>>> gas off their coasts.
>>>
>>> A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey-conducted before McCain
>>> announced his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters believe
>>> that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida
>>> and other states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative
>>> and moderate voters strongly support this approach, while liberals are
>>> more evenly divided (46% of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose).
>>>
>>> Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe it is at least somewhat
>>> likely that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is allowed,
>>> although 27% don't believe it. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of
>>> conservatives say offshore drilling is at least somewhat likely to drive
>>> prices down. That view is shared by 57% of moderates and 50% of liberal
>>> voters.
>>>
>>> Nearly all voters are worried about rising gas and energy prices, with
>>> 79% very concerned and 16% somewhat concerned.
>>>
>>> McCain is expected to formally call today (Tuesday) for the lifting of
>>> the federal moratorium on states being allowed to explore off their
>>> coasts for oil and gas deposits. While acknowledging it is only a
>>> short-term response, he has described it as a good first step toward
>>> reducing U.S. energy dependence on overseas sources.
>>>
>>> The Outer Continental Shelf moratorium, passed in 1981, bans exploration
>>> for offshore natural gas and oil deposits. Barack Obama, McCain's
>>> opponent for the White House, voted against an effort to lift the ban
>>> last year in the Senate. He argued that it was only a short-term
>>> solution. National Democratic Party leaders and most environmental
>>> organizations for years have strongly opposed efforts to explore for oil
>>> off the coast of the U.S.
>>>
>>> According to the new survey, 85% of Republicans are in favor of offshore
>>> drilling as opposed to 57% of Democrats and 60% of unaffiliated voters.
>>> Those who call themselves conservatives favor such drilling 84% to 46%
>>> of liberals and 59% of self-designated moderates.
>>>
>>> African-American voters are less supportive of such drilling than
>>> whites - 58% to 71%.
>>>
>>> Women are more skeptical than men about the impact such drilling will
>>> have on gas prices: Nearly one out of three male voters (32%) say prices
>>> are very likely to go down, a view shared by only 23% of women.
>>>
>>> Four out of five Republicans (79%) think prices are likely to fall
>>> thanks to offshore drilling, a view shared by only 55% of Democrats.
>>> Sixty percent (60%) of unaffiliated voters expect it to happen.
>>>
>>> Voters also believe 61% to 22% that oil companies should be required to
>>> reinvest at least a portion of their profits into alternative energy
>>> research. On this question, liberal and moderate voters are strongly
>>> supportive of the proposal while conservatives are more evenly divided
>>> (47% of conservatives in favor, 35% opposed)
>>>
>>> Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new
>>> energy sources is the best long-term solution to the nation's energy
>>> problem. Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more
>>> likely to solve the nation's energy problem than government research
>>> programs. But, at the same time, only 52% said companies should be
>>> allowed to keep the profits from the discovery of any alternative fuel
>>> sources.
>> On the flip side Bush & Company are whores for business interests that
>> have encouraged the flooding of America by illegal aliens.And they
>> really consume energy and public resources. Anything for a quick buck.
>> Both whoreish major parties ignore the energy consumption of another 1
>> million legal immigrants a year. I hope gas
>> reaches at least $6.00 per gallon. Perhaps we can make the relative
>> easy switch to electrics, etc. Nothing will happen until the
>> gelationous comatose public exhibits some personal energy in demanding
>> alternatives. The boobs don't realize that offshore oil is 7 to 10
>> years from delivery.
>>
>> ted
>
> "Voters also believe 61% to 22% that oil companies should be required to
> reinvest at least a portion of their profits into alternative energy
> research."
> Wow. They're for a windfall profit tax, too.

Your credible citation for Americans wanting Fascism is?

> However,
>
> "Four out of five Republicans (79%) think prices are likely to fall thanks
> to offshore drilling,"
>
> Which proves Rightards are idiots.
>
> "a view shared by only 55% of Democrats. Sixty percent (60%) of
> unaffiliated voters expect it to happen."
>
> ...and that's how "stupid" happens.

Lamont Cranston

6/19/2008 2:05:00 PM

John Galt wrote:
> <wismel@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3rni54h6vp4pkbmcfv71a23gu9da6ptai7@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:22:55 -0700, "MioMyo"
>> <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>But the Imperial Princess Pelosi and Obstructionist Democraps in
>>>Congress are Brought and Paid Whores to the Hate-America
>>>ENVIRONMENTAL LOBBYISTS.....
>>>
>>>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/67_support_offshore_drilling_64_expect_it_will_lo...
>>>
>>>Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United
>>>States and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John
>>>McCain has announced
>>>his support for states that want to explore for oil and gas off their
>>>coasts.
>>>
>>>A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey-conducted before McCain
>>>announced his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters
>>>believe that drilling
>>>should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other
>>>states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and
>>>moderate voters strongly support this approach, while liberals are
>>>more evenly divided (46%
>>>of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose).
>>>
>>>Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe it is at least somewhat
>>>likely that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is
>>>allowed, although 27% don't believe it. Seventy-eight percent (78%)
>>>of conservatives say offshore drilling is at least somewhat likely
>>>to drive prices down. That view is shared by 57% of moderates and
>>>50% of liberal voters.
>>>Nearly all voters are worried about rising gas and energy prices,
>>>with 79% very concerned and 16% somewhat concerned.
>>>
>>>McCain is expected to formally call today (Tuesday) for the lifting
>>>of the federal moratorium on states being allowed to explore off
>>>their coasts for oil and gas deposits. While acknowledging it is
>>>only a short-term response,
>>>he has described it as a good first step toward reducing U.S. energy
>>>dependence on overseas sources.
>>>
>>>The Outer Continental Shelf moratorium, passed in 1981, bans
>>>exploration for
>>>offshore natural gas and oil deposits. Barack Obama, McCain's
>>>opponent for the White House, voted against an effort to lift the
>>>ban last year in the Senate. He argued that it was only a short-term
>>>solution. National Democratic Party leaders and most environmental
>>>organizations for years have
>>>strongly opposed efforts to explore for oil off the coast of the U.S.
>>>
>>>According to the new survey, 85% of Republicans are in favor of
>>>offshore drilling as opposed to 57% of Democrats and 60% of
>>>unaffiliated voters. Those who call themselves conservatives favor
>>>such drilling 84% to 46% of liberals and 59% of self-designated
>>>moderates.
>>>African-American voters are less supportive of such drilling than
>>>whites - 58% to 71%.
>>>
>>>Women are more skeptical than men about the impact such drilling
>>>will have on gas prices: Nearly one out of three male voters (32%)
>>>say prices are very
>>>likely to go down, a view shared by only 23% of women.
>>>
>>>Four out of five Republicans (79%) think prices are likely to fall
>>>thanks to
>>>offshore drilling, a view shared by only 55% of Democrats. Sixty
>>>percent (60%) of unaffiliated voters expect it to happen.
>>>
>>>Voters also believe 61% to 22% that oil companies should be required
>>>to reinvest at least a portion of their profits into alternative
>>>energy research. On this question, liberal and moderate voters are
>>>strongly supportive of the proposal while conservatives are more
>>>evenly divided (47%
>>>of conservatives in favor, 35% opposed)
>>>
>>>Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new
>>>energy
>>>sources is the best long-term solution to the nation's energy
>>>problem. Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more
>>>likely to solve the nation's energy problem than government research
>>>programs. But, at the same time, only 52% said companies should be
>>>allowed to keep the profits from the discovery of any alternative
>>>fuel sources.
>> On the flip side Bush & Company are whores for business interests
>> that have encouraged the flooding of America by illegal aliens.
>
> What's the opposite of being a "whore for business interests"?
> Wanting to shut all businesses down and return to pre-industrial
> revolution America?
>>And they
>> really consume energy and public resources. Anything for a quick
>> buck. Both whoreish major parties ignore the energy consumption of
>> another 1 million legal immigrants a year. I hope gas
>> reaches at least $6.00 per gallon. Perhaps we can make the relative
>> easy switch to electrics, etc. Nothing will happen until the
>> gelationous comatose public exhibits some personal energy in
>> demanding alternatives.
>
> According to the subject line and the Rasmussen poll, 2/3 of the
> gelatinous comatose public is no longer comatose on this issue.
> They've apparently read read the articles that consistently discuss
> that alternatives are AT LEAST 50 years (probably 100) away from
> providing any sort of substantive replacement for fossil fuels,
> intuitively understand that supply and demand has *not* been
> suspended vis a vis the energy industry, and would prefer not being
> reduced to an agrarian society by no-progress, no-growth political
> elements that could give a damn about the average American as long as
> their ideologic crotch is getting scratched.
> The boobs don't realize that offshore oil is 7 to 10
>> years from delivery.
>
> They know it. The also know that the "50" noted above is a lot longer
> than "7 to 10", and that the real risk are the boobs that don't
> understand that we're "7 to 10" years away from economic destruction
> should oil continue to appreciate at even a quarter of the current
> rate.
> Four bucks a gallon and rising due to huge demand growth in China and
> India.

Over four bucks a gallon and rising due to rampant speculation. Demand has
not changed.

> Huge untapped reserves in oil, oil shale, coal (for coal
> gasification), and natural gas.
>
> Fun's over. Time to drill.

It won't matter. Market forces do not control the price of gasoline -- an
oligopoly does.

>
> JG

John Galt

6/19/2008 2:15:00 PM

"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@penumbra.com> wrote in message
news:g3doug$h3a$1@news.datemas.de...
> John Galt wrote:
>> <wismel@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:3rni54h6vp4pkbmcfv71a23gu9da6ptai7@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:22:55 -0700, "MioMyo"
>>> <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>But the Imperial Princess Pelosi and Obstructionist Democraps in
>>>>Congress are Brought and Paid Whores to the Hate-America
>>>>ENVIRONMENTAL LOBBYISTS.....
>>>>
>>>>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/67_support_offshore_drilling_64_expect_it_will_lo...
>>>>
>>>>Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United
>>>>States and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John
>>>>McCain has announced
>>>>his support for states that want to explore for oil and gas off their
>>>>coasts.
>>>>
>>>>A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey-conducted before McCain
>>>>announced his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters
>>>>believe that drilling
>>>>should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other
>>>>states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and
>>>>moderate voters strongly support this approach, while liberals are
>>>>more evenly divided (46%
>>>>of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose).
>>>>
>>>>Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe it is at least somewhat
>>>>likely that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is
>>>>allowed, although 27% don't believe it. Seventy-eight percent (78%)
>>>>of conservatives say offshore drilling is at least somewhat likely
>>>>to drive prices down. That view is shared by 57% of moderates and
>>>>50% of liberal voters.
>>>>Nearly all voters are worried about rising gas and energy prices,
>>>>with 79% very concerned and 16% somewhat concerned.
>>>>
>>>>McCain is expected to formally call today (Tuesday) for the lifting
>>>>of the federal moratorium on states being allowed to explore off
>>>>their coasts for oil and gas deposits. While acknowledging it is
>>>>only a short-term response,
>>>>he has described it as a good first step toward reducing U.S. energy
>>>>dependence on overseas sources.
>>>>
>>>>The Outer Continental Shelf moratorium, passed in 1981, bans
>>>>exploration for
>>>>offshore natural gas and oil deposits. Barack Obama, McCain's
>>>>opponent for the White House, voted against an effort to lift the
>>>>ban last year in the Senate. He argued that it was only a short-term
>>>>solution. National Democratic Party leaders and most environmental
>>>>organizations for years have
>>>>strongly opposed efforts to explore for oil off the coast of the U.S.
>>>>
>>>>According to the new survey, 85% of Republicans are in favor of
>>>>offshore drilling as opposed to 57% of Democrats and 60% of
>>>>unaffiliated voters. Those who call themselves conservatives favor
>>>>such drilling 84% to 46% of liberals and 59% of self-designated
>>>>moderates.
>>>>African-American voters are less supportive of such drilling than
>>>>whites - 58% to 71%.
>>>>
>>>>Women are more skeptical than men about the impact such drilling
>>>>will have on gas prices: Nearly one out of three male voters (32%)
>>>>say prices are very
>>>>likely to go down, a view shared by only 23% of women.
>>>>
>>>>Four out of five Republicans (79%) think prices are likely to fall
>>>>thanks to
>>>>offshore drilling, a view shared by only 55% of Democrats. Sixty
>>>>percent (60%) of unaffiliated voters expect it to happen.
>>>>
>>>>Voters also believe 61% to 22% that oil companies should be required
>>>>to reinvest at least a portion of their profits into alternative
>>>>energy research. On this question, liberal and moderate voters are
>>>>strongly supportive of the proposal while conservatives are more
>>>>evenly divided (47%
>>>>of conservatives in favor, 35% opposed)
>>>>
>>>>Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new
>>>>energy
>>>>sources is the best long-term solution to the nation's energy
>>>>problem. Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more
>>>>likely to solve the nation's energy problem than government research
>>>>programs. But, at the same time, only 52% said companies should be
>>>>allowed to keep the profits from the discovery of any alternative
>>>>fuel sources.
>>> On the flip side Bush & Company are whores for business interests
>>> that have encouraged the flooding of America by illegal aliens.
>>
>> What's the opposite of being a "whore for business interests"?
>> Wanting to shut all businesses down and return to pre-industrial
>> revolution America?
>>>And they
>>> really consume energy and public resources. Anything for a quick
>>> buck. Both whoreish major parties ignore the energy consumption of
>>> another 1 million legal immigrants a year. I hope gas
>>> reaches at least $6.00 per gallon. Perhaps we can make the relative
>>> easy switch to electrics, etc. Nothing will happen until the
>>> gelationous comatose public exhibits some personal energy in
>>> demanding alternatives.
>>
>> According to the subject line and the Rasmussen poll, 2/3 of the
>> gelatinous comatose public is no longer comatose on this issue.
>> They've apparently read read the articles that consistently discuss
>> that alternatives are AT LEAST 50 years (probably 100) away from
>> providing any sort of substantive replacement for fossil fuels,
>> intuitively understand that supply and demand has *not* been
>> suspended vis a vis the energy industry, and would prefer not being
>> reduced to an agrarian society by no-progress, no-growth political
>> elements that could give a damn about the average American as long as
>> their ideologic crotch is getting scratched.
>> The boobs don't realize that offshore oil is 7 to 10
>>> years from delivery.
>>
>> They know it. The also know that the "50" noted above is a lot longer
>> than "7 to 10", and that the real risk are the boobs that don't
>> understand that we're "7 to 10" years away from economic destruction
>> should oil continue to appreciate at even a quarter of the current
>> rate.
>> Four bucks a gallon and rising due to huge demand growth in China and
>> India.
>
> Over four bucks a gallon and rising due to rampant speculation. Demand
> has not changed.
>
>> Huge untapped reserves in oil, oil shale, coal (for coal
>> gasification), and natural gas.
>>
>> Fun's over. Time to drill.
>
> It won't matter. Market forces do not control the price of gasoline -- an
> oligopoly does.

Which ones? The Rothchilds, or the Freemasons?

JG

Nicklas

6/19/2008 2:39:00 PM

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:14:37 -0500, "John Galt"
<whoisjohngalt@bluebottle.com> wrote:

>> It won't matter. Market forces do not control the price of gasoline -- an
>> oligopoly does.
>
>Which ones? The Rothchilds, or the Freemasons?

Bush/Cheney/Saudis are Freemasons?

zzbunker@netscape.net

6/19/2008 6:30:00 PM

On Jun 19, 10:04 am, "Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Crans...@penumbra.com>
wrote:
> John Galt wrote:
> > <wis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:3rni54h6vp4pkbmcfv71a23gu9da6ptai7@4ax.com...
> >> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:22:55 -0700, "MioMyo"
> >> <USA_Patr...@Somewhere.com> wrote:
>
> >>>But the Imperial Princess Pelosi and Obstructionist Democraps in
> >>>Congress are Brought and Paid Whores to the Hate-America
> >>>ENVIRONMENTAL LOBBYISTS.....
>
> >>>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/gen.......
>
> >>>Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United
> >>>States and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John
> >>>McCain has announced
> >>>his support for states that want to explore for oil and gas off their
> >>>coasts.
>
> >>>A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey-conducted before McCain
> >>>announced his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters
> >>>believe that drilling
> >>>should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other
> >>>states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and
> >>>moderate voters strongly support this approach, while liberals are
> >>>more evenly divided (46%
> >>>of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose).
>
> >>>Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe it is at least somewhat
> >>>likely that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is
> >>>allowed, although 27% don't believe it. Seventy-eight percent (78%)
> >>>of conservatives say offshore drilling is at least somewhat likely
> >>>to drive prices down. That view is shared by 57% of moderates and
> >>>50% of liberal voters.
> >>>Nearly all voters are worried about rising gas and energy prices,
> >>>with 79% very concerned and 16% somewhat concerned.
>
> >>>McCain is expected to formally call today (Tuesday) for the lifting
> >>>of the federal moratorium on states being allowed to explore off
> >>>their coasts for oil and gas deposits. While acknowledging it is
> >>>only a short-term response,
> >>>he has described it as a good first step toward reducing U.S. energy
> >>>dependence on overseas sources.
>
> >>>The Outer Continental Shelf moratorium, passed in 1981, bans
> >>>exploration for
> >>>offshore natural gas and oil deposits. Barack Obama, McCain's
> >>>opponent for the White House, voted against an effort to lift the
> >>>ban last year in the Senate. He argued that it was only a short-term
> >>>solution. National Democratic Party leaders and most environmental
> >>>organizations for years have
> >>>strongly opposed efforts to explore for oil off the coast of the U.S.
>
> >>>According to the new survey, 85% of Republicans are in favor of
> >>>offshore drilling as opposed to 57% of Democrats and 60% of
> >>>unaffiliated voters. Those who call themselves conservatives favor
> >>>such drilling 84% to 46% of liberals and 59% of self-designated
> >>>moderates.
> >>>African-American voters are less supportive of such drilling than
> >>>whites - 58% to 71%.
>
> >>>Women are more skeptical than men about the impact such drilling
> >>>will have on gas prices: Nearly one out of three male voters (32%)
> >>>say prices are very
> >>>likely to go down, a view shared by only 23% of women.
>
> >>>Four out of five Republicans (79%) think prices are likely to fall
> >>>thanks to
> >>>offshore drilling, a view shared by only 55% of Democrats. Sixty
> >>>percent (60%) of unaffiliated voters expect it to happen.
>
> >>>Voters also believe 61% to 22% that oil companies should be required
> >>>to reinvest at least a portion of their profits into alternative
> >>>energy research. On this question, liberal and moderate voters are
> >>>strongly supportive of the proposal while conservatives are more
> >>>evenly divided (47%
> >>>of conservatives in favor, 35% opposed)
>
> >>>Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new
> >>>energy
> >>>sources is the best long-term solution to the nation's energy
> >>>problem. Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more
> >>>likely to solve the nation's energy problem than government research
> >>>programs. But, at the same time, only 52% said companies should be
> >>>allowed to keep the profits from the discovery of any alternative
> >>>fuel sources.
> >> On the flip side Bush & Company are whores for business interests
> >> that have encouraged the flooding of America by illegal aliens.
>
> > What's the opposite of being a "whore for business interests"?
> > Wanting to shut all businesses down and return to pre-industrial
> > revolution America?
> >>And they
> >> really consume energy and public resources. Anything for a quick
> >> buck. Both whoreish major parties ignore the energy consumption of
> >> another 1 million legal immigrants a year. I hope gas
> >> reaches at least $6.00 per gallon. Perhaps we can make the relative
> >> easy switch to electrics, etc. Nothing will happen until the
> >> gelationous comatose public exhibits some personal energy in
> >> demanding alternatives.
>
> > According to the subject line and the Rasmussen poll, 2/3 of the
> > gelatinous comatose public is no longer comatose on this issue.
> > They've apparently read read the articles that consistently discuss
> > that alternatives are AT LEAST 50 years (probably 100) away from
> > providing any sort of substantive replacement for fossil fuels,
> > intuitively understand that supply and demand has *not* been
> > suspended vis a vis the energy industry, and would prefer not being
> > reduced to an agrarian society by no-progress, no-growth political
> > elements that could give a damn about the average American as long as
> > their ideologic crotch is getting scratched.
> > The boobs don't realize that offshore oil is 7 to 10
> >> years from delivery.
>
> > They know it. The also know that the "50" noted above is a lot longer
> > than "7 to 10", and that the real risk are the boobs that don't
> > understand that we're "7 to 10" years away from economic destruction
> > should oil continue to appreciate at even a quarter of the current
> > rate.
> > Four bucks a gallon and rising due to huge demand growth in China and
> > India.
>
> Over four bucks a gallon and rising due to rampant speculation. Demand has
> not changed.
>
> > Huge untapped reserves in oil, oil shale, coal (for coal
> > gasification), and natural gas.
>
> > Fun's over. Time to drill.
>
> It won't matter. Market forces do not control the price of gasoline -- an
> oligopoly does.

Well, that's hardly true. The idiot oligopoly controls the price of
odometers
and The History Channel. Which is why infinitely smarter people
even invented mircocomputers, internet, artificial intelligence,
lasers,
satellites, ethanol, wind energy, digital terrain mapping,
DVD+RW. robots, PV Cells, and cruise missiles.

>
>
>
>
>
> > JG- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.interop

c# dealing with c++ dll

jerome.dapot@voila.fr

(Mattias Sjögren)

jerome.dapot@voila.fr

John Galt

r wiley

MioMyo

MioMyo

Lamont Cranston

John Galt

Nicklas

zzbunker@netscape.net

x Login to ForumsZone