From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-123803-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 90284 invoked by alias); 24 Jun 2015 16:54:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 90271 invoked by uid 89); 24 Jun 2015 16:54:52 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-vn0-f74.google.com
Received: from mail-vn0-f74.google.com (HELO mail-vn0-f74.google.com) (209.85.216.74) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:54:51 +0000
Received: by vnav203 with SMTP id v203so1536108vna.0        for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 09:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:from:to:cc         :content-type;        bh=gH96142dNa4KGNPCMtGukPrhU8jcxmM+Z0C6ZYqUGQo=;        b=NQdhvHif6hRiLG0wPfSL+QINsj9uVA7px8GsKAIqpIbr73YuW2JZdjc+kNfy2s8IeO         0AuWvDbcvEtkswRIXgVSDq7EzE4OyuiC1ah72pqrxk/cy5uYnG+kk5CURwG9RXapPkvN         n0RV+BbgSAP1CWyoq7d437KGfsq1agDDvRGx2YM2C8fFkIMKQ15MEo3WeakKmxS1r2o4         hNxE4j36fQ7yepfW33cn+BkykWkuyZPcGYv/wN5i3462fAgfbZVzFNh78awudpOPRcbe         E6jANax3eH+A4jgbg7V0nv2eJTaAflZmq2zXRgNyNE/KgI7y2wmJ6cBbTOxcPg8mnmMb         zj8g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmEhPHLK4W5yZK+f0MeJHPBowU2v/OeOxzznQn2/BDAj7Isq6Eih3QXP4W7ICatmWOJFcZo
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.201.82 with SMTP id w79mr10074199qha.2.1435164888908; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 09:54:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <001a113baba665ed0d0519465d3c@google.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:54:00 -0000
Subject: Re: [RFC] Revisit PR 16253 ("Attempt to use a type name...")
From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00538.txt.bz2

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).