diff options
| author | Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org> | 2013-04-08 18:56:15 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org> | 2013-04-08 18:56:15 +0000 |
| commit | b6e8a86b1c8c1718a29c1e4e02380b83ee4bc7c3 (patch) | |
| tree | 693af3d28128190cf38205f4eb1cfe85d18d3d40 /www | |
| parent | cac9ee0b129b8d8d4088ecf5068202886850aa2c (diff) | |
| download | clang-b6e8a86b1c8c1718a29c1e4e02380b83ee4bc7c3.tar.gz | |
In the comparison, both clang and GCC are popular and widely adopted. This is no longer a win of GCC.
This whole doc should really be looked at.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@179040 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Diffstat (limited to 'www')
| -rw-r--r-- | www/comparison.html | 1 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/www/comparison.html b/www/comparison.html index e8b14923b6..afc321e061 100644 --- a/www/comparison.html +++ b/www/comparison.html @@ -51,7 +51,6 @@ <li>GCC supports languages that clang does not aim to, such as Java, Ada, FORTRAN, etc.</li> <li>GCC supports more targets than LLVM.</li> - <li>GCC is popular and widely adopted.</li> </ul> <p>Pro's of clang vs GCC:</p> |