From: Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:38:50 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: be more clear about what we are comparing.
X-Git-Url: https://granicus.if.org/sourcecode?a=commitdiff_plain;h=74a165bc4e2e5f74cf72e05b60da8debabbd1733;p=clang

be more clear about what we are comparing.


git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@44795 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
---

diff --git a/www/comparison.html b/www/comparison.html
index aa11b5fa2e..dc9f70d51c 100644
--- a/www/comparison.html
+++ b/www/comparison.html
@@ -16,11 +16,11 @@
     <p>Building an entirely new compiler front-end is a big task, and it isn't
        always clear to people why we decided to do this.  Here we compare clang
        and its goals to other open source compiler front-ends that are
-       available.  We restrict the discussion to very specific technical points
-       to avoid controversy where possible.  Also, since software is infinitely
-       mutable, so focus on architectural issues that are impractical to fix
-       without a major rewrite, instead of talking about little details that
-       can be fixed with a reasonable amount of effort.</p>
+       available.  We restrict the discussion to very specific objective points
+       to avoid controversy where possible.  Also, software is infinitely
+       mutable, so we don't talk about little details that can be fixed with 
+       a reasonable amount of effort: we'll talk about issues that are 
+       difficult to fix for architectural or political reasons.</p>
        
     <p>The goal of this list is to describe how differences in goals lead to
        different strengths and weaknesses, not to make some compiler look bad.