_processWithdrawal Can Be Rewritten To Be More Efficient (PublicSale.sol)

[code423n4]

Handle

ye0lde

Vulnerability details

Impact

_processWithdrawal Can Be Rewritten To Be More Efficient (PublicSale.sol)

The "else", the setting of "value to 0", and the return statement can be eliminated to reduce gas and improve code clarity.

Proof of Concept

The _processWithdrawal function is here:
https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-11-bootfinance/blob/7c457b2b5ba6b2c887dafdf7428fd577e405d652/tge/contracts/PublicSale.sol#L212-L229

Tools Used

Visual Studio Code, Remix

Recommended Mitigation Steps

I recommend rewriting it as follows:

function _processWithdrawal (uint _era, uint _day, address _member) private returns (uint value) {
uint memberUnits = mapEraDay_MemberUnits[_era][_day][_member]; // Get Member Units

    if (memberUnits != 0) {
        value = getEmissionShare(_era, _day, _member);          // Get the emission Share for Member
        mapEraDay_MemberUnits[_era][_day][_member] = 0;  // Set to 0 since it will be withdrawn
        mapEraDay_UnitsRemaining[_era][_day] = mapEraDay_UnitsRemaining[_era][_day].sub(memberUnits);  // Decrement Member Units
        mapEraDay_EmissionRemaining[_era][_day] = mapEraDay_EmissionRemaining[_era][_day].sub(value);  // Decrement emission
        totalEmitted += value;                                                 // Add to Total Emitted
        uint256 v_value = value * 3 / 10;                                 // Transfer 30%, lock the rest in vesting contract             
        mainToken.transfer(_member, v_value);                      // ERC20 transfer function
        vestLock.vest(_member, value - v_value, 0);
        emit Withdrawal(msg.sender, _member, _era, _day, value, mapEraDay_EmissionRemaining[_era][_day]);
    }
}