Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 17:56 UTC

yhirose / cpp-peglib

A single file C++ header-only PEG (Parsing Expression Grammars) library

C++ · RustMIT★ 1,063 stars⑂ 129 forkssince Feb 2015View on GitHub ↗

yhirose/cpp-peglib holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (91/100) and lowest on Security (50/100). It was last updated 27 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

80
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

yhirosePersonal account
1,313 followers63 public repossince Aug 2010

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

80Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 27 days ago
9.7/36Commit cadence — 14/52 weeks with commits
17.8/18Commit volume — 94 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year94
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push27
active_weeks_last_year14

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 59 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 27 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~15.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count59
latest_release_tagv1.17.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release27
mean_days_between_releases15.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

63Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
49.1/60Stars — 1,063 stars
17.6/25Forks — 129 forks
8/15Watchers — 28 watchers
Inputs used
forks129
stars1,063
watchers28
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 92% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 23 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled23
top_contributor_share0.922
How it's scored
41.8/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
21.7/30PR acceptance — 55/76 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs55
open_issues1
closed_issues265
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.996
closed_unmerged_prs21
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
22.4/25Owner reach — 1,313 followers of yhirose
25/25Track record — 63 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,313
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginyhirose
public_repos63
account_age_days5,881
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

91Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://yhirose.github.io/cpp-peglib/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscpp, peg, parsing-expression-grammars, parsing, c-plus-plus, header-only, parser-generator, cpp17
has_wikino
homepagehttps://yhirose.github.io/cpp-peglib/
docs_sitehttps://yhirose.github.io/cpp-peglib/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate3.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages15
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 15 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

74Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 79 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.79
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — justfile, pl0/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C++ (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 5 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesjustfile, pl0/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.05
toolchain_manifestsharness/rust/Cargo.toml, rust-peglib/Cargo.toml, rust-peglib/orc-jit/Cargo.toml, rust-peglib/pl0/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C++ (statically typed)
51.9/55Manageable file sizes — 3/54 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC++
largest_source_bytes243,364
source_files_sampled54
oversized_source_files3
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — example, samples
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, samples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

1,063GitHub stars
23contributors
94commits, last 12 months
27days since last push
59releases
1bus factor
1open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch crates package 'peglib' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'spec-harness' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'pl0' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'orc-jit' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 129 ⇿
0Stars
129Forks
59Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

025507510012512542015-102021-032026-09
Major 1Minor 17Patch 41

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.8 / 10
3.8aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-09-14 17:56 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iopeglib—harness/rust/Cargo.toml
crates.ioregex1harness/rust/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1harness/rust/Cargo.toml
crates.iopeglib—rust-peglib/pl0/Cargo.toml
crates.ioorc-jit—rust-peglib/pl0/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 15

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 13 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioregex1.12.3direct
crates.ioserde_json1.0.149direct
crates.ioaho-corasick1.1.4indirect
crates.ioitoa1.0.18indirect
crates.iomemchr2.8.0indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.106indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.45indirect
crates.ioregex-automata0.4.14indirect
crates.ioregex-syntax0.8.10indirect
crates.ioserde1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserde_core1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.228indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.117indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.24indirect
crates.iozmij1.0.21indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 15 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics.