Conversation
|
Hey! I totally agree, the current numpad is no match for a physical one. And the numrow layer has a similar limitation (no Here’s what I will dogfood for some time, building on your proposal: -XX home up end pgup @/ @7 @8 @9 XX
-XX lft down rght pgdn @- @4 @5 @6 @0
-@/ @* @- @+ @= _ @, @1 @2 @3 @.
+XX home up end pgup @/ @7 @8 @9 XX
+bspc lft down rght pgdn @- @4 @5 @6 @0
+@= @% @* @: @+ _ @, @1 @2 @3 @.
|
|
Thanks, I’ll try this too :) |
Co-authored-by: fnuttens <8812165+fnuttens@users.noreply.github.com>
I just don't understand this: it works for me. But it is no needed anyways. NB: I made another commit to allow easy referencing different version, but if this PR is merged, those should be squashed I think. |
|
@nim65s oh you’re right, my bad! The |
Hi,
For use in a calculator or spreadsheet, I would expect basic operators to be available. And numpad layer has enough space for those, so here is a simple proposition.