From: news-1326478115@discworld.dascon.de   
      
   On 2015-10-03, Francois LE COAT  wrote:   
   > Well, the starting demo with a spinning hypercube is not played. The   
   > GEM interface seems correct, but if I want to describe a curve, the   
   > curve is not drawn. If I want to draw a surface, the surface is   
   > not drawn. Nothing happens with the binary like it should. The   
   > binary is simply not corresponding to sources. The program is broken.   
      
   Im my experience with optimizing compilers, in most such cases the fault is   
   not with the compiler, but instead the source code is broken, doing things   
   that are not allowed by the C standard and relying on undefined behaviour.   
      
   If it worked with the older compiler (that had a weaker optimizer) that does   
   not mean anything for the correctness of the source code.   
      
   Did you compile with all warning enabled, and look at the warnings? I can't   
   believe old, misbehaving code would compile after a gcc3 -> gcc4 switch   
   without producing at least some new warnings!   
      
   cu   
   Michael   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)