Solana Zig

C 62 completed
Other
unknown / zig · tiny
37
Files
2,270
LOC
0
Frameworks
6
Languages

Pipeline State

completed
Run ID
#1406997
Phase
done
Progress
0%
Started
2026-04-16 06:14:18
Finished
2026-04-16 06:14:18
LLM tokens
0

Pipeline Metadata

Stage
Skipped
Decision
skip_scaffold_dup
Novelty
20.51
Framework unique
Isolation
Last stage change
2026-04-16 18:15:42
Deduplication group #49193
Member of a group with 43 similar repo(s) — canonical #1591863 view group →
Repobility's GitHub App fixes findings like these · https://github.com/apps/repobility-bot

AI Prompt

Create a Zig implementation library for Solana capabilities, aiming to mirror the semantics of the Rust SDK. I need core structures like `Pubkey`, `Signature`, and `Keypair`, along with types for transactions such as `Instruction` and `VersionedTransaction`. The library should include an `RpcClient` capable of performing common RPC calls like `getLatestBlockhash`, `getAccountInfo`, `getBalance`, `simulateTransaction`, and `sendTransaction`. It should also feature an injectable transport abstraction for testing. Please structure the project to handle both off-chain SDK foundations and plan for future on-chain semantics.
zig solana blockchain rpc sdk zig-lang crypto zig-build
Generated by gemma4:latest

Catalog Information

Create a Zig implementation library for Solana capabilities, aiming to mirror the semantics of the Rust SDK. I need core structures like Pubkey, Signature, and Keypair, along with types for transactions such as Instruction and VersionedTransaction. The library should include an RpcClient capable of performing common RPC calls like getLatestBlockhash, getAccountInfo, getBalance, simulateTransaction, and sendTransaction. It should also feature an injectable transport abstract

Tags

zig solana blockchain rpc sdk zig-lang crypto zig-build

Quality Score

C
61.8/100
Structure
57
Code Quality
88
Documentation
50
Testing
15
Practices
71
Security
80
Dependencies
70

Strengths

  • CI/CD pipeline configured (github_actions)
  • Consistent naming conventions (snake_case)

Weaknesses

  • No LICENSE file — legal ambiguity for contributors
  • No tests found — high risk of regressions
  • Potential hardcoded secrets in 2 files
  • 220 duplicate lines detected — consider DRY refactoring
  • 1 'god files' with >500 LOC need decomposition

Recommendations

  • Add a test suite — start with critical path integration tests
  • Add a linter configuration to enforce code style consistency
  • Add a LICENSE file (MIT recommended for open source)
  • Move hardcoded secrets to environment variables or a secrets manager

Languages

zig
66.5%
markdown
31.5%
yaml
1.0%
rust
0.5%
toml
0.3%
json
0.2%

Frameworks

None detected

Symbols

function1

Quality Timeline

1 quality score recorded.

View File Metrics

Embed Badge

Add to your README:

![Quality](https://repos.aljefra.com/badge/1087773.svg)
Quality BadgeSecurity Badge
Export Quality CSVDownload SBOMExport Findings CSV