18 Aug
1999
18 Aug
'99
10:48 p.m.
Sorry to revive such an old thread, but I've only just caught up with list
traffic since I went away...
Aha! That makes perfect sense. Good eye.
Well, it might if either the 4/3/2/1 and the 5/6/7/0 columns were in the
same order. ... but ... what's that 0 doing "after" the 7? In short,
I don't see it is vaguely appropriate for octal, either :)
I don't much like 0 after 7, any more than I like 0 after 9 on a telephone dial
(or keypad for that matter).
But the layout above does give the digits 0 to 7 around a (non-circular) ring,
so I think it would work for octal.
I would have preferred either:
C D E F
8 9 A B
4 5 6 7
0 1 2 3
which is a good octal and hex keypad, or:
7 8 9 F
4 5 6 E
1 2 3 D
0 A B C
which incorporates the usual calculator pad.
Anyone else have preferred layouts?
Philip.
4 5 8 C
W R
3 6 9 D P D
2 7 A E L S
1 0 B F X B
-------------- ------
Hmmmm... kinda neat if you're programming in Octal all the time...
then the layout gets almost, dare I use the word: 'ergonomic'.....?