Zokyo Gas Savings
  • โ›ฝZokyo Gas Savings
  • ๐Ÿ“šTutorials
    • โœ”๏ธGas Saving Technique 1: Unchecked Arithmetic
    • โ›“๏ธGas Saving Technique 2: Immutable Variable
    • โœจGas Saving Technique 3: Double star ** inefficiency
    • ๐Ÿ’ฐGas Saving Technique 4: Cache Array Length
    • โฌ…๏ธGas Saving Technique 5: ++i costs less gas compared to i++
    • โš–๏ธGas Saving Technique 6: NOT operator ! cheaper than boolean FALSE
    • ๐ŸชกGas Saving Technique 7: Using Short Reason Strings
    • ๐ŸชตGas Saving Technique 8: Use Custom Errors instead of Revert Strings to save Gas
    • โœ’๏ธGas Saving Technique 9: Use Custom Errors instead of Revert Strings to save Gas
    • ๐Ÿ‘พGas Saving Technique 10: Calldata cheaper than memory
    • โ›”Gas Saving Technique 11: > 0 is less efficient than != 0 for unsigned integers
    • โž—Gas Saving Technique 12: SafeMath no longer needed
    • ๐Ÿ˜ฎGas Saving Technique 13: variables default to 0
    • ๐ŸงฑGas Saving Technique 14: struct layout/ variable packing
    • ๐Ÿ“žGas Saving Technique 15: Cache External Call
    • โœ๏ธGas Saving Technique 16: Early Validation before external call
    • ๐Ÿ˜ŽGas Saving Technique 17: Donโ€™t cache value that is used once
    • ๐Ÿ˜งGas Saving Technique 18: Redundant code
    • โœ…Gas Saving Technique 19: Early Validation before external call
    • โ›๏ธGas Saving Technique 20: Storage vs Memory read optimizations
    • โœ’๏ธGas Saving Technique 21: Unneeded If statements
    • ๐ŸŒ—Gas Saving Technique 22: >= is cheaper than >
    • ๐ŸŽ’Gas Saving Technique 23: Public to private constants
    • โน๏ธGas Saving Technique 24: Make unchanged variables constant/immutable
    • โฑ๏ธGas Saving Techniques 25: Redundant Access Control Checks
    • โžก๏ธGas Saving Technique 26: Shift Right instead of Dividing by 2
    • ๐ŸชƒGas Saving Tutorial 27: Efficient Boolean Comparison
    • ๐ŸคGas Saving Technique 28: && operator uses more gas
    • ๐Ÿ‘“Gas Saving Technique 29: x = x + y is cheaper than x += y
    • ๐Ÿ‘‚Gas Saving Technique 30: Using 1 and 2 rather than 0 and 1 saves gas
    • โšฝGas Saving Technique 31: Optimize Storage by Avoiding Booleans
    • ๐Ÿ”™Gas Saving Technique 32: Optimal Use of Named Return Variables in Solidity
    • ๐Ÿ›ข๏ธGas Saving Technique 33: Making Functions Payable for Optimized Gas Costs
    • โœ๏ธGas Saving Technique 34: Optimizing Storage References in Smart Contracts
    • โ›ฐ๏ธGas Saving Technique 35: Usage of uints/ints smaller than 32 bytes (256 bits) incurs overhead
    • ๐ŸŒช๏ธGas Saving Technique 36: Inlining Single Use Internal Functions for Savings
    • โ˜„๏ธGas Saving Technique 37: Switching from Public to External Functions for Savings
    • ๐ŸŽ†Gas Saving Technique 38: Upgrading Solidity Compiler to Improve Gas Efficiency and Security
    • ๐Ÿ•ถ๏ธGas Saving Technique 39: Avoiding Duplicated Code for Gas Savings
    • ๐Ÿ˜„Gas Saving Technique 40: Removal of Unused Internal Functions for Gas Savings
    • ๐Ÿ–‹๏ธGas Saving Tutorial 41: In-lining Single Use Modifiers For Gas Saving
    • โ›๏ธGas Saving Technique 42: `require` vs`assert`
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  1. Tutorials

Gas Saving Technique 22: >= is cheaper than >

PreviousGas Saving Technique 21: Unneeded If statementsNextGas Saving Technique 23: Public to private constants

Last updated 1 year ago

Introduction: In the meticulous world of Solidity programming, the nuances between strict and non-strict comparisons might seem trivial. However, these minute details can play a significant role in gas efficiency. This tutorial aims to shed light on the advantages of using non-strict comparisons over their strict counterparts in terms of gas optimization.


Concept: When it comes to inequality comparisons in Solidity, non-strict inequalities like >= are often cheaper in gas than their strict counterparts, such as >. This gas differential arises from the supplementary checks (like ISZERO) associated with strict inequalities. Hence, a small shift in programming practiceโ€”favoring non-strict comparisons where applicableโ€”can lead to gas savings.


Underlying Problem:

  1. Supplementary Opcodes: Strict inequalities involve extra operations like the ISZERO opcode, which costs an additional 3 gas units.

  2. Minor Overhead Accumulates: In contracts with frequent calls or in high-traffic protocols, these seemingly minuscule gas costs can accumulate rapidly, leading to more expensive interactions over time.


Example:

Using Strict Inequality:

solidityCopy codereturn principal > calculatedDebt ? principal : calculatedDebt;

Optimized with Non-Strict Inequality:

solidityCopy codereturn principal >= calculatedDebt ? principal : calculatedDebt + 1;

Recommendation:

  1. Scan your contracts to identify occurrences of strict inequalities, like >.

  2. Consider if the logic allows for replacement with non-strict comparisons, such as >=, without compromising functionality.

  3. Modify the code and adjust any affected logic accordingly.

  4. Conduct rigorous testing to verify that the change hasn't introduced any unwanted behaviors.

  5. As a best practice, always favor non-strict comparisons when writing new contracts, unless strictness is necessary for the contract's logic.


Conclusion: The world of smart contracts is one where the difference of a few gas units can have a sizable impact, especially over numerous transactions. Embracing non-strict comparisons offers a simple yet effective method to optimize for gas efficiency. As developers, focusing on such minute details ensures the development of cost-effective and efficient smart contracts, benefiting both the end-users and the network.

๐Ÿ“š
๐ŸŒ—
Book an audit with Zokyo