goto nosideret;
if (binop_user_defined_p (op, arg1, arg2))
return value_x_binop (arg1, arg2, op, OP_NULL, noside);
- else if (noside == EVAL_AVOID_SIDE_EFFECTS
- && (op == BINOP_DIV || op == BINOP_REM || op == BINOP_MOD
- || op == BINOP_INTDIV))
- return value_zero (value_type (arg1), not_lval);
else
- return value_binop (arg1, arg2, op);
+ {
+ /* If EVAL_AVOID_SIDE_EFFECTS and we're dividing by zero,
+ fudge arg2 to avoid division-by-zero, the caller is
+ (theoretically) only looking for the type of the result. */
+ if (noside == EVAL_AVOID_SIDE_EFFECTS
+ /* ??? Do we really want to test for BINOP_MOD here?
+ The implementation of value_binop gives it a well-defined
+ value. */
+ && (op == BINOP_DIV
+ || op == BINOP_INTDIV
+ || op == BINOP_REM
+ || op == BINOP_MOD)
+ && value_logical_not (arg2))
+ {
+ struct value *v_one, *retval;
+
+ v_one = value_one (value_type (arg2), not_lval);
+ retval = value_binop (arg1, v_one, op);
+ return retval;
+ }
+ else
+ return value_binop (arg1, arg2, op);
+ }
case BINOP_RANGE:
arg1 = evaluate_subexp (NULL_TYPE, exp, pos, noside);
{
struct type *type = check_typedef (value_type (x));
- if (VALUE_LVAL (x) == lval_memory)
+ if (VALUE_LVAL (x) == lval_memory || value_must_coerce_to_target (x))
return value_zero (lookup_pointer_type (value_type (x)),
not_lval);
else if (TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_REF)
return value_zero (lookup_pointer_type (TYPE_TARGET_TYPE (type)),
not_lval);
else
- error (_("Attempt to take address of non-lval"));
+ error (_("Attempt to take address of value not located in memory."));
}
return value_addr (x);
}