I tend to agree with RMS, at least on his philosophy of free software. That being said, I don't think adding LLDB support to emacs is a bad thing, and I don't t

I tend to agree with RMS, at least on his philosophy of free software. That being said, I don't think adding LLDB support to emacs is a bad thing, and I don't think the rise of clang/LLVM will be a big hit to free software. As long as there are people who care about freedom, people will maintain GCC. Even if the worst case happens, and there is extreme fragmentation of proprietary patch-sets to LLVM, we can always still use GCC, or even still use the free parts of LLVM/clang. While there is some issue with fragmentation of the developer community, I see this as a non-issue. These things generally work themselves out through the natural ebb and flow of chaotic systems (just like the economy is largely self-regulating). We can always still use GCC. I don't really see where the issue is, am I missing something?