3 ms·

I have very little knowledge of GCC procedure, but I've seen these linked from a pro-clang comparison. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-11/msg00460.html http://g

• _delirium 17y ago
  That's probably accurate, but supports something a bit different on the timeline: Stallman opposed a change in the gcc architecture in the 2000s that he thought would make it easier for companies to make proprietary derivatives. But that's not quite the same as saying he wrote it in the 80s to deliberately prevent it from being extensible. When he was writing it in the 80s, getting a whole C compiler written from scratch was probably the bigger design goal. I tend to find the sniping at Stallman over gcc a little annoying overall. There are plenty of ways I disagree with Stallman's strategy, but from a "show me the code" perspective, he produced a free-software C compiler suitable for use in a modern free Unix 25 years before any of the MIT/BSD-license proponents did (until llvm, their only real alternative was the original pcc from the 1970s, which is why the BSDs all grudgingly use gcc).