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

[Doug Evans]

Jan Kratochvil writes:
  > 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.

I dunno.
We still have to keep gdb working well enough without "compile",
(other languages, core files, embedded systems)
and compile-object-load.c calls block_lookup_symbol
("compile" still relies on gdb's symbol lookup machinery).