In 2017, I co-authored a paper that presented a system of hexadecimal digits that could be combined as ligatures to form base-256 digits. It's online here. In 2019, someone posted a system of base-256 digits on Reddit that I and the other author agree is better: Made a surprisingly simple base-256 numerical system...
In our paper, we enumerated 9 desirable qualities for a set of hexadecimal digits in order to evaluate different sets. This other system has/hasn't the qualities as follows:
- MNE: Yes
- STR: No
- LIG: Yes
- AMB: Yes
- DSP: Yes
- BIN: Yes
- 0: No
- 1: No
- TRN: Yes
This system has 6 of the 9 enumerated qualities. This is 2 fewer qualities than our published system, but I nevertheless think it is a better system because 1) its base-256 "ligatures" are easier to write and 2) I can remember how these digits encode binary numbers much more easily than our published system, and therefore this system would be easier for me to use. Well done, u/Tuckertcs, whoever you are.
On another topic, in our paper we suggested the name "sedecisedecimal" for base-256 numbers. I still think it's the best Latin/Greek-based name for them. Would anyone seriously prefer "duocentehexaquinquagesimal"?
Posts
