What I'm looking at doing is replacing it with a component that I've built around the colorer library. Colorer supports over 100 languages, has somewhat more powerful parsing capabilities, and is written in native C++ such that the component I've built around it can process a 3K file of Python source in ~500ms, 1K of C++ in ~90ms, and 95K of C++ in ~3800ms. There's still more optimization to be done.
Here's a couple of examples of the kind of output I'm producing: 1, 2. Take a look at the HTML sources to those. There's a lot of detail in there.
Some of the languages that colorer supports are missing potential extensions - Oluseyi suggested hilighting standard library functions in Python, for example - but it's open-source, and the way you specify a language for the parser is a published standard, so it shouldn't be too hard for people to do the bulk of my work for me on those things. We'll also benefit from any new languages that other people using Colorer contribute, or optimizations they make to the parsing engine, while also keeping our ability to develop it further ourselves if we want to.
This is how OSS is supposed to work - it just frequently doesn't. (I'm still to discover exactly how I contribute the changes I've made to the code back into the codebase on sourceforge).
