I have to wonder... Why did you not use the already existing syntaxhighlighting class that is behind the SRC_EMBED code in the main site? It has a great coverage of different languages (and a cooler color theme selection!)*.
I'm just sad seeing that my code is not being used :(
*) At least, when you upgrade it in case it's an older version
So here's my test on PHP, from
http://bisqwit.iki.fi/story/howto/php/#StringConstructs.
[code php]<?php
// These two statements are equivalent:
$a = "Apples are $x each.";
$a = 'Apples are ' . $x . ' each.';
// These two statements are equivalent:
$a = "Apples are \$x each.";
$a = 'Apples are $x each.';
// These three statements are equivalent:
$a = "Your {$item->name} is {$item->kind} and expires in {$item->eta} days.";
$a = "Your ${item->name} is ${item->kind} and expires in ${item->eta} days.";
$a = 'Your ' . $item->name . ' is '
. $item->kind . ' and expires in '
. $item->eta . ' days.';
// These four statements are equivalent:
$a = "The file is {$stat["size"]} bytes long.";
$a = "The file is {$stat['size']} bytes long.";
$a = 'The file is ' . $stat["size"] . ' bytes long.';
$a = 'The file is ' . $stat['size'] . ' bytes long.';
// Variable inclusions may be very complex, even recursive,
// to the chagrin of writers of syntax highlighters.
// These two statements are equivalent:
$a = "This is {$table["subtable{$subnums["current"]}"][$position['now']]}.";
$a = 'This is ' . $table[ 'subtable' . $subnums['current'] ]
[ $position['now'] ]
. '.'; /* still in sync? */[/code]
Another one, of BASIC:[code basic]10 DEFINT A-Z
20 SCREEN 0: WIDTH 40,25: KEY OFF
30 ' Define all distinct tetromino shapes as bitmasks
31 DATA CC,8C4,6C,4444,F0,264,C6,E4,4C4,4E0,464,8E,C88,E2,226,2E,88C,E8,622
32 REM e.g. 8C4 = 1000, 2E = 0010
33 REM 1100 1110
34 REM 0100 and so on.
35 DIM SHAPES(18): FOR A=0 TO 18: READ S$: SHAPES(A)=VAL("&H"+S$): NEXT
40 ' Define the mappings of block number -> block shape
41 DATA 0,0,0,0, 1,2,1,2, 3,4,3,4, 5,6,5,6, 7,8,9,10, 11,12,13,14, 15,16,17,18
45 DIM INDICES(28): FOR A=0 TO 27: READ INDICES(A): NEXT
50 ' This function reads the given slot from the given block in given rotation.
52 DIM BITMASKS(15): FOR A=0 TO 14: BITMASKS(A) = 2^A: NEXT'Note: 2^15=overflow
55 DEF FNBLOCK(BL,ROT,X,Y) = SHAPES(INDICES(BL*4+ROT))AND BITMASKS(Y*4+X)
900 ' Subroutine for drawing a "pixel", i.e. one block slot.
901 ' Params: x,y, c
910 LOCATE Y+1,X+1: AREA(X,Y)=C
920 IF C THEN COLOR C AND 15: PRINT CHR$(219); : RETURN
930 COLOR 1: PRINT FNEMPTY$(X);
940 RETURN
999 WIDTH 80: COLOR 7,0: PRINT "GAME OVER": KEY ON: END ' simple.[/code]Gotcha.
And for C++:
[code c++]template<typename T>
struct Array256x256of: public Array256x256of_Base
{
public:
T data[256*256];
public:
Array256x256of() { }
virtual ~Array256x256of() { }
public:
virtual uint32 GetLive(unsigned method, unsigned index, unsigned timer) const
{
return (data[index].*(T::methods[method]))(timer);
}
virtual uint32 GetStatic(unsigned index) const
{
return GetLive(bgmethod, index, 0);
}
virtual void Set(unsigned index, uint32 p, unsigned timer)
{
data[index].set(p, timer);
}
};[/code]
Original material (no artifacts)
Encoding: RGB→YV12 Using Lanczos
Decoding: YV12→RGB Using Lanczos (High-quality software)
Comment: The spheres are very round and pleasant to look at, but there are ringing artifacts where chroma changes are most dramatic (the 5 and 6 balls look like they're floating on jello)
Encoding: RGB→YV12 Using Lanczos
Decoding: YV12→RGB Using Nearest-neighbor (Software default)
Comment: There are extra grays and the spheres appear blockier. The 3 ball has grown a ghost image. The 5 ball has changed shape entirely. Even the wall has grown a shadow for no reason at all.
Encoding: RGB→YV12 Using Lanczos
Decoding: YV12→RGB Using Windows default (maybe hardware-accelerated, maybe software quadratic scaling)
Comment: The difference to lanczos-lanczos is almost unnoticeable. The ringing artifacts are smaller though.
Encoding: RGB→YV12 Using Nearest-neighbor
Decoding: YV12→RGB Using Lanczos (High-quality software)
Comment: This combination smudges stuff profusely.
The smudging still only happens on chroma; the luma (luminance, which is what the grayscale image shows) is unaffected and appears as in the original.
Encoding: RGB→YV12 Using Nearest-neighbor
Decoding: YV12→RGB Using Nearest-neighbor (Software default)
Comment: The effect of halving the chroma resolution is very noticeable. Some pixels are simply wrong color. The score meter is very blocky. But there are no ringing artifacts whatsoever.
This is the picture you should look at, if you want to learn what chroma supersampling ― using the same chroma for every 2x2 pixel group ― means and what are its practical consequences. All of the others use mathematical filter trickery to attempt to make the fact less noticeable.
Encoding: RGB→YV12 Using Nearest-neighbor
Decoding: YV12→RGB Using Windows default (maybe hardware-accelerated, maybe software quadratic scaling)
Comment: Better than the above two. There is an artifact beside the number "5" that does not exist in the lanczos-encoded versions. The power meter edges are very blurry.
I am actually surprised of the fact that the grayscale images did not appear to be completely identical. Wasn't the point of these filters to scale the chroma, not the luma? But in retrospect, this is probably an artifact of RGB conversions; there are YUV values that cannot be expressed losslessly in RGB, so additional brightness is "loaned" from other color components by decreasing the saturation. Or something. Waiting for a better explanation.
SUMMARY:
