Good point, it is doing (int-complex), observe also the following pecularities:

>>> -0 - 0j
0j
>>> -0. - 0j
(-0+0j)
>>> -0j
-0j
>>> 0-0j
0j
>>> -(0j)
(-0-0j)
>>> 0.+(-0j)
0j

Does this mean the bug is in repr() ? As I understand the output of repr() is supposed to be something that can evaluated to recreate the same object. However I am unsure whether it would be nicer if repr() were to yield 'complex(-0.,-0.)' or '-(-0.+0j)'.