From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
To: "Cuthbertson, Reva D." <reva_cuthbertson@hp.com>
Cc: <gdb@sources.redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Question regarding execute_stack_op in dwarf2expr.c
Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 07:50:00 -0000
Message-id: <vt2fz9ui5o9.fsf@zenia.home>
References: <B6C7F31B85669143825614FC8FE64929014C1746@cacexc04.americas.cpqcorp.net>
X-SW-Source: 2004-05/msg00629.html

"Cuthbertson, Reva D." <reva_cuthbertson@hp.com> writes:
> I have a question regarding execute_stack_op() in dwarf2expr.c.  
> In the switch statement where the binary operators are being 
> processed, should there be a "break" after the cases for 
> DW_OP_div and DW_OP_shr?  

Yes!  Thanks for pointing that out.  I've committed the following:

2004-05-21  Jim Blandy  <jimb@redhat.com>

	* dwarf2expr.c (execute_stack_op): Add 'break' statements after
	cases for DW_OP_div and DW_OP_shr.  (Thanks to Reva Cuthbertson.)

Index: gdb/dwarf2expr.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/dwarf2expr.c,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -c -p -r1.11 dwarf2expr.c
*** gdb/dwarf2expr.c	17 Jan 2004 23:09:29 -0000	1.11
--- gdb/dwarf2expr.c	21 May 2004 07:48:13 -0000
*************** execute_stack_op (struct dwarf_expr_cont
*** 575,580 ****
--- 575,581 ----
  		break;
  	      case DW_OP_div:
  		binop = BINOP_DIV;
+                 break;
  	      case DW_OP_minus:
  		binop = BINOP_SUB;
  		break;
*************** execute_stack_op (struct dwarf_expr_cont
*** 595,600 ****
--- 596,602 ----
  		break;
  	      case DW_OP_shr:
  		binop = BINOP_RSH;
+                 break;
  	      case DW_OP_shra:
  		binop = BINOP_RSH;
  		val1 = value_from_longest (signed_address_type (), first);