Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

A more efficient for loop index proceeding #49

Open
code423n4 opened this issue Jan 5, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

A more efficient for loop index proceeding #49

code423n4 opened this issue Jan 5, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working G (Gas Optimization) resolved Finding has been patched by sponsor (sponsor pls link to PR containing fix) sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity")

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

Jujic

Vulnerability details

Impact

Here you could use unchecked{++i} to save gas since it is more efficient then i++.

for (uint256 i; i < ids.length; i++) {

Proof of Concept

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-01-timeswap/blob/bf50d2a8bb93a5571f35f96bd74af54d9c92a210/Timeswap/Timeswap-V1-Core/contracts/TimeswapPair.sol#L359

Tools Used

Remix

Recommended Mitigation Steps

@code423n4 code423n4 added bug Something isn't working G (Gas Optimization) labels Jan 5, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 5, 2022
@Mathepreneur Mathepreneur added sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity") and removed sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity") labels Jan 15, 2022
@Mathepreneur
Copy link
Collaborator

@Mathepreneur Mathepreneur added the resolved Finding has been patched by sponsor (sponsor pls link to PR containing fix) label Jan 17, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working G (Gas Optimization) resolved Finding has been patched by sponsor (sponsor pls link to PR containing fix) sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity")
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants