[OscarCunningham]

Yes that makes perfect sense. So why is int(-1.5) == -1? It should be -2.

[Skeime]

There is math.floor for rounding towards negative infinity, which has the advantage of being crystal clear.

[mmcnickle]

The same reason int(-1.999) is -1; The operation is different to integer division. I think of it as taking the "integer" part of the float.

[Izkata]

As the article mentions, this is called truncation. It truncates (cuts off) the value at the decimal point.

[consp]

because it's a float and not an int, it's strictly talking about integers here, not floats. All int conversions of floats are converted by discarding the remainder afaik but I could be wrong here (e.g. int(1.9) == 1, and int(-1.9) == -1)

edit: -3//2 == -2 for instance, since it's strictly integer division

[cygx]

It's a valid criticism: By the principle of least surprise, one should strive for a//b = int(a/b).

Basically, there's no free lunch. Personally, I prefer truncating integer division in combination with a pair of remainder operators.

[odyssey7]

Inspired by Monty Python, the surprises are part of the charm. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯