[RFC] Revisit PR 16253 ("Attempt to use a type name...")

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 20:39:52 +0200, Keith Seitz wrote:
> [But then my philosophy is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." As far as
> I can tell, block_lookup_symbol is not "broke."]

I agree, just I think a proper fix would cover also block_lookup_symbol().
But then it is questionable what is a proper fix as after this fix the C++
expression support still remains poor.  The proper GDB fix is C++ 'compile'
support being worked on.



Jan