One of the concerns mentioned is "GCC needing to bring in newcomers by young students and experiments from academia, while most new developments these days are using LLVM", i.e. that there _eventually_ will not be sufficient community to make those adjustments. I think that concern is justified and may not even be limited to gcc. Any open source project without significant commercial backing will have problems staying attractive to developers for decades. Why would anybody volunteer to work on a decades old and, because of it, somewhat crusty, codebase for free?
Yes, gcc has commercial backers, too, but I think at the moment most of them are more willing to pay for the support of additional architectures or architecture variants than for new language features (at the moment; that can change if C++11 gets more commonly used)
Yes, gcc has commercial backers, too, but I think at the moment most of them are more willing to pay for the support of additional architectures or architecture variants than for new language features (at the moment; that can change if C++11 gets more commonly used)