> If pins were numbered by columns, you would have to connect two tracks to one end of the chip and two other tracks to the other end of the chip.
You have missed my point entirely. All you have to do is re-label them. There is absolutely no re-wiring or re-routing implied by changing the pin numbers.
No I haven't, but I've failed to convince you, it seems.
It does make a difference because the chip designer doesn't know or doesn't care how the chip is going to be packaged and where the pins are going to be placed on the package.
With the standard numbering, two consecutive pins are always placed next to eachother no matter the package, and the chip designer can use this information to optimize the placement of related pins.
This is not true with the alternative numbering "by column", where pin 4 and 5 are close on most packages, but far away on a DIP 8 package.
You have missed my point entirely. All you have to do is re-label them. There is absolutely no re-wiring or re-routing implied by changing the pin numbers.