"Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Conversion of out-of-range integers to signed types is > implementation-defined not undefined,
Thanks for the correction; I keep forgetting that. However, a conforming implementation is allowed to raise a signal for those conversions, which could break the code in question, i.e., it could cause the test to report the wrong result. So the distinction between undefined and implementation-defined behavior doesn't much matter here. (Presumably the code could work around the problem by trapping the signal, but that is another can of porting worms.) I daresay many conversions of out-of-range values to signed integers are in a similar boat.
