I would heavily advise against this, both as a former graphic-designer-turned-workflow-consultant with a heavy focus on making training documentation, and as a current IT professional and hobby game developer. It introduces ambiguity, which should always be snuffed out as soon as it’s noticed.
That text could be part of the same “cell”, though, and it would be more cohesive. Only issue is it needing to be clear that you need to be able to click both the 100 and the mm to change them.
As for moving the home button, I wouldn’t take it out of the “D pad”, that 3x3 are all buttons that do the same thing (move the sled around). I would just reduce the height of the cells and have that text all on one line.
To be clear, this would be reducing the height of that lowest row by half, and then shrinking the leftmost column’s cells evenly to line up with the bottom of the bottom row.
Don’t get me wrong, I like condensing. I’d really like something like this to be workable:
Only issue is that this makes it unclear if the distance is for Z, XY, or both. I haven’t had my Maslow on in almost 2 weeks, but I remember being able to set Z travel distance, separately and it isn’t even present in this bit. I’m hoping I’m just second guessing myself there, though, and that it makes sense somewhere deep down in the gaps of my memory.
All that said, if you wanted to condense, I would suggest adding some padding between certain buttons so they can be rearranged to look nicer without hugely increasing the risk of misclicks and introduce separation from the D-pad/dist-to-move and the up/down-z buttons to show that the set distance only applies to XY movement.
If that worked out, we’d have that whole “row” under the D-pad where dist-to-move currently is freed up for other buttons. If it were for adding extend/retract, though, I’d put them above this set of buttons.