Please note that in your linked bug report (which I also linked as a related bug), that the issue involved -0 and +0, not an off-by-1 error which is what this issue is reporting.
Also, please note in the section above the "Reason that I expected it". As this this behavior is apparently intentional, it's my duty to point out that this is an unreasonable intention (i.e., it does not stand to reason).
Further, if this behavior is intentional, then positive integers should be affected as well and they are not (i.e., XYZ: 10.5 76 26.5 should translate to Block: 11 76 27 and it does not).
Pete Hopkins
@Galaxy_2Alex
Thank you for your prompt response.
Please note that in your linked bug report (which I also linked as a related bug), that the issue involved -0 and +0, not an off-by-1 error which is what this issue is reporting.
Also, please note in the section above the "Reason that I expected it".
As this this behavior is apparently intentional, it's my duty to point out that this is an unreasonable intention (i.e., it does not stand to reason).
Further, if this behavior is intentional, then positive integers should be affected as well and they are not (i.e., XYZ: 10.5 76 26.5 should translate to Block: 11 76 27 and it does not).