As a developer, no matter what language you use, the most imperative task is to keep track of changes that are introduced in the newer versions of the language and tools. As I am a solidity dev, I missed this change and found out recently through a post. I am talking about an imperative change in Solidity’s statement that most Smart Contract developers are perhaps still unaware of. Additionally, it seems quite a few articles around this topic are outdated. LinkedIn assert() Solidity Let’s see what has changed and how it affects devs and users. Statement What do we know about Solidity’s assert() so far? One of the major differences that you might have noticed between and statements in solidity is that: assert() require() ▶️ If statements fail, they consume all of the Gas provided in a transaction assert() ▶️ If statements fail, they refund the remaining gas back to the caller require() Here is a simple example of the above statements, when we use a version less than 0.8.0. // SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT

pragma solidity <0.8.0;

contract AssertTest {address public owner = msg.sender;

uint256 public requirecounter;  
uint256 public assertcounter;  

function assertFun() external {  
    assert(msg.sender == owner);  

    assertcounter = 10;  

     //gas 3000000 gas  
     //transaction cost 3000000 gas   
     //execution cost 2978936 gas  
}  

function requireFun() external {  
    require(msg.sender == owner);  

    requirecounter = 20;  
       //gas 3000000 gas  
       //transaction cost 23415 gas   
       //execution cost 2351 gas  
}  

} As you can see doesn’t refund the remaining gas but does. assert() require() Let’s dive into the details and understand why To begin with, you first need to understand the difference between two specific opcodes in the EVM, i.e., 𝙄𝙉𝙑𝘼𝙇𝙄𝘿(0xfe) & 𝙍𝙀𝙑𝙀𝙍𝙏(0xfd). 𝐈𝐍𝐕𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐃: As per this opcode, the EVM must revert all state changes and consume all the gas sent in a transaction. No gas refunds for the sender of transactions.𝐑𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐓: As per this opcode, the EVM must revert all state changes but should also return the remaining gas to the sender. Here is a reference from the yellow paper about this difference Now, in previous versions of Solidity, the function used the INVALID opcode, which consumed all remaining gas in a transaction upon execution. assert() This behavior lead to issues like limiting the gas refunds for users and complicating debugging due to the lack of information provided by the INVALID opcode. Well, since solidity version 0.8.0, this difference is no more true. Because after the launch of solidity 0.8.0, the behavior of statements has changed. assert() What Changed? After solidity 0.8.0, the 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐠𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. It now 𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐠𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫. 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐭() However, since Solidity version 0.8.0, the function now uses the REVERT opcode, which does not consume all gas in a transaction but actually returns any remaining gas to the transaction’s sender. assert() With this change, the REVERT opcode now allows for better gas management, providing users with greater control over their gas usage. This change has made it possible for developers to design more complex and gas-efficient smart contracts, which can lead to cost savings for both developers and users. Below is the same code we saw before, but this time we used a solidity version greater than 0.8.0. Notice, this time the function using is using only partial gas and refunding the rest of it. assert() // SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT

pragma solidity <0.8.0;

contract AssertTest {address public owner = msg.sender;

uint256 public requirecounter;  
uint256 public assertcounter;  

function assertFun() external {  
    assert(msg.sender == owner);  

    assertcounter = 10;  

       //gas 3000000 gas  
       //transaction cost 23404 gas   
       //execution cost 2340 gas  
}  

function requireFun() external {  
    require(msg.sender == owner);  

    requirecounter = 20;  
       //gas 3000000 gas  
       //transaction cost 23415 gas   
       //execution cost 2351 gas  
}  

} Now you might recall one of the optimization tricks is to throw the error as soon as possible inside a function. Because the more function will execute the more gas will be used, and at the point it hits the error, very less gas will be remaining and be refunded. Note for Solidity Devs 📝It’s imperative for you as a smart contract developer to keep up with the latest changes in the language, as solidity evolves quite rapidly. Always keep an eye on Solidity’s official documentation, blogs, etc, and validate the information that you read online. Stay curious, keep learning, and keep building! Also published here.

Hot off the press! This story contains factual information about a recent event.

Inside the Governance Hack of Tornado Cash

Fungible Tokens: Tracing the Evolution of Digital Assets 

Everything related to EVM, solidity, Ethereum

Read My Stories

Too Long; Didn't Read

Make resilience your competitive advantage

An Update to Solidity’s ‘Assert()’ Statement You Might’ve Missed

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

Blockchain Explained - For Noobs

108 Stories To Learn About Blockchain Adoption

10 Tools for Blockchain Development

133 Stories To Learn About Solidity

287 Stories To Learn About Blockchain Development

Blockchain Explained - For Noobs

108 Stories To Learn About Blockchain Adoption

10 Tools for Blockchain Development

133 Stories To Learn About Solidity

287 Stories To Learn About Blockchain Development

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps