Feature or enhancement

Proposal:

I made a custom_colorize theme to try making my REPL syntax highlighting look similar to my text editor's.

This is the theme I used:

theme_with_dim_operators=default_theme.copy_with(syntax=Syntax(keyword=ANSIColors.GREEN,builtin=ANSIColors.BLUE,comment=ANSIColors.INTENSE_YELLOW,string=ANSIColors.CYAN,number=ANSIColors.CYAN,definition=ANSIColors.BLUE,soft_keyword=ANSIColors.BOLD_GREEN,    ),)

I then used this example code to check the highlighting between the two:

frommathimportpiprint(f"Welcome to Python{pi:.2f}")name=NoneifnameisNone:print("It's",True)

Pasting that code in my text editor (vim), looks like this:

Pasting the same code in the REPL, looks like this:

The granularity with syntax highlighting needs to stopsomewhere, but I feel it would be nice to add a bit more granularity than is currently supported by_colorize.

In particular, it would be nice to distinguish between:

1. Syntax keywords in general (if,is,def,for,with, etc.)
2. Keywords that are variables (True,False,None)
3. Imports in particular (from,import)

I feel that distinguishing between 1 and 2 is more important than between 1 and 3. WhileNoneis a keyword, seeing it appear in the same color asis and other keywords feels odd.

Has this already been discussed elsewhere?

This is a minor feature, which does not need previous discussion elsewhere

Links to previous discussion of this feature:

No response

Linked PRs

• gh-134953: Expand theming forTrue/False/None #135000
• [3.14] gh-134953: Expand theming forTrue/False/None (GH-135000) #138928
• gh-134953: Make the True/False/None check more efficient #138931
• [3.14] gh-134953: Make the True/False/None check more efficient (GH-138931) #138939