There are features that are in LLVM that are not in the GPL'd alternative. Stallman's policy is to not support those features in emacs. To not support proprietary software is one thing, to not support free software LLVM features because it is a competitor to a GNU program that doesn't have those features is another thing.
By the way, RMS did support the switch of Ogg Vorbis to a BSD licence on "pragmatic" grounds. Pragmatically, aren't we better off that Apple, Nvidia, Intel, Adobe and others are using and contributing to LLVM rather than a proprietary solution (and they either would not have, or could not have, used GCC for the use cases they had in mind)? Isn't there an argument to be made that, without LLVM, we wouldn't have free OpenCL compilers?
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds