Base change notation

[franktaw at netscape.net]

I really don't like the base change notation that is used for a number 
of OEIS entries.  This involves writing:

(b) [n] (c),

meaning "write n in base b, and reinterpret as base c".  The main 
problem is that it is not distinctive enough; it looks like it means 
b*n*c.  Also, the "n" in the center can get a bit lost.

Instead, I propose writing:

n_{b->c}.

This avoids both problems I described above; and it is clear enough 
that I think someone might guess what it means.

(The "->" of course represents an arrow, which is what would be used if 
writing by hand or if typesetting.)

Franklin T. Adams-Watters