Re: Hexadecimal digits

From: André Szabolcs Szelp (
Date: Tue Jun 08 2010 - 01:14:46 CDT

  • Next message: Luke-Jr: "Re: Hexadecimal digits"

    >> One mentioned 0123456789ABCDEF, and the fact that one has software
    >> already
    >> which does sums in this hexadecimal notation.
    > That works for software, but not so much for human communication.

    The main obstacle to use hexadecimal in human communication are not
    the symbols used in its notation, but that every single human language
    uses 10-based numbers in *speech*, with at most minor deviations (e.g.
    eleven, twelve). The overall system is always 10-based. (10, 100,
    1000, (10000 in indian and chinese), 1000000) etc. have their own
    names, numbers composed are to be understood in the decimal system
    (nine million fivehundred thousand seventy two translates exactly and
    directly to the _decimal_ notation 9500072), whereas it would be
    pretty hard, even with Nyström's numbers (give the poor guy his dots,
    we have Unicode after all) to immediately convert the above number
    into writing.
    BTW, this is also the main reason why decimal and SI _is_ more usable
    than any pre-SI system, including the Imperial/English you claim to be
    superior in several respects.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 08 2010 - 01:19:16 CDT