* Mark Dickinson: > In practice, yes, I think so. In theory, no: the result of the conversion is > implementation defined for numbers outside the range of the signed type. > (C99 6.3.1.3). But I'd be surprised if any implementation on a two's > complement machine does anything other than just preserve the bit > pattern, as you'd expect. It really depends on your compiler writer's meaning of "implementation-defined". It's not too far-fetched that some think that the comparison against zero should be replaced with 0 because it can never be true.
