How do you balance gas optimization with contract readability?

Long Answer

For a dApp developer, the challenge of gas optimization is balancing efficiency with long-term readability and maintainability. A contract must be cost-effective for users but also understandable for auditors and future maintainers. Optimizations that obscure logic or introduce subtle bugs often cost more in risk than they save in fees. The best practice is incremental optimization guided by profiling, applied where it matters most.

1) Start with profiling, not guessing
Premature optimization often leads to unreadable code with negligible savings. Use Hardhat Gas Reporter, Foundry’s gas-snapshot, or Tenderly to profile transactions. Identify true hotspots (loops, storage writes, complex calculations) and focus there. Communicate clearly: “95% of gas comes from this mapping update—optimize that first.”

2) Storage vs memory vs calldata
The most expensive operation in Ethereum is storage writes. Favor reading from memory or calldata where possible. Use calldata for external function parameters, especially arrays, to avoid unnecessary copies. Minimize redundant storage writes—update state once after logic, not multiple times mid-function. Pack variables into the same 256-bit slot when feasible, but document these choices for clarity.

3) Loop and control flow optimization
Avoid unbounded loops. If loops are required, batch operations or let users process incrementally (pull over push). Use unchecked math for counters where overflow is impossible (after Solidity 0.8’s safe math). Pre-calculate invariants outside loops. Still, ensure code remains clear; replacing loops with assembly macros saves gas but increases maintenance overhead—use only in extreme cases.

4) Events, not storage
For logging, prefer emitting events over writing to storage when persistence is not required for contract logic. Events are cheaper and still allow indexing off-chain. Example: recording vote history via events rather than redundant mappings. Balance: don’t remove critical storage just to save gas—business logic comes first.

5) Modifiers, libraries, and code reuse
Abstract logic into internal functions or libraries. While inline code may be cheaper in some cases, libraries reduce duplication and centralize optimizations. Use modifiers carefully—sometimes merging them saves gas, but readability suffers. The balance: document modifiers and only merge when measurable savings exist.

6) Low-level and advanced optimizations
Yul/inline assembly can shave costs but reduces readability and auditability. Use sparingly and comment heavily. Similarly, precomputing keccak constants or caching length values saves gas, but be explicit. Example: store bytes32 hash instead of recalculating, but add comments so future developers know why.

7) Upgradeability and maintainability
In complex dApps, contracts evolve. Over-optimized, cryptic code is hard to upgrade. Use patterns like proxy + storage gaps for upgradeability. Keep naming clear, functions modular, and document all optimizations. The true cost of confusing code is higher audit expense, developer churn, and hidden bugs.

8) Communication of trade-offs
Stakeholders may push for maximum savings. As a developer, explain trade-offs: “This micro-optimization saves 2k gas per call but reduces readability; instead, let’s focus on storage packing which saves 20% consistently.” Frame optimization in terms of user cost impact vs maintenance risk.

Summary
Gas optimization is about prioritization. Eliminate obvious inefficiencies (storage, loops, repeated ops) while preserving contract readability and maintainability. Document optimizations clearly, avoid premature assembly tricks, and lean on profiling. The result: contracts that are both cheap to run and safe to maintain.

‍

Table

‍

Common Mistakes

Developers often over-optimize too early—writing cryptic assembly for tiny gains. Another mistake is ignoring readability: future maintainers can’t reason about optimizations, leading to bugs. Over-packing variables without documentation causes subtle storage collisions. Skipping calldata use wastes gas in external calls. Using events everywhere and removing critical storage undermines on-chain integrity. Neglecting monitoring—deploying “optimized” code without gas profiling tools. Finally, failing to balance user cost savings against developer productivity—an unreadable contract may save cents but cost thousands in audits.

‍

Sample Answers (Junior / Mid / Senior)

Junior:
“I’d start with simple wins: use calldata in external functions, minimize storage writes, and test with Hardhat Gas Reporter. I’d avoid complex tricks until needed.”

Mid:
“I balance optimization and clarity. I use expand/contract storage updates, pack variables when safe, and batch loops. I profile with Foundry gas snapshots and document all optimizations in code comments.”

Senior:
“My approach: profile first, optimize hotspots. I prioritize storage minimization and event-based logging. Where needed, I use Yul for critical paths but heavily document it. I frame trade-offs for stakeholders: e.g., packing storage saves 20% gas vs merging modifiers saves 1% but hurts clarity. Maintainability remains a core principle.”

‍

Evaluation Criteria

Interviewers expect answers that emphasize profiling first, then applying structured gas optimizations. Strong responses include: using calldata, minimizing storage writes, batching operations, and applying expand/contract patterns. They mention documenting optimizations, balancing readability, and only using assembly sparingly. They highlight monitoring tools (Hardhat, Foundry, Tenderly) to validate changes. The best candidates explain trade-offs in business/user terms: lowering transaction costs while keeping code maintainable. Weak answers: “Just use assembly everywhere” or “pack everything” without governance or documentation.

‍

Preparation Tips

Experiment with contracts in Foundry or Hardhat using gas reporters. Practice implementing storage packing, calldata use, and event logging. Measure real gas savings in test deployments. Write versions of the same function (naive vs optimized) and compare. Document optimizations clearly in comments—practice explaining them in plain language. Prepare examples where micro-optimizations weren’t worth it, and you prioritized maintainability. Rehearse a 60–90 second answer that frames optimization as: profile → optimize → document → balance. Be ready to explain trade-offs to non-technical stakeholders: “We saved 20% gas while keeping code readable and secure.”

‍

Real-world Context

Uniswap V3 uses heavy gas optimization: packed storage, precomputed constants, and inline assembly for math. But every optimization is heavily documented and audited to preserve maintainability. A DAO governance contract reduced user gas by switching to calldata arrays and emitting events instead of redundant mappings. Another DeFi team over-optimized with dense assembly, saving gas but creating audit nightmares—bugs cost millions in exploits. Lesson: optimization works when paired with readability, governance, and strong audits. Contracts must save user costs without undermining developer velocity or system security.

‍

Key Takeaways

• Profile gas usage before optimizing.
  
• Favor calldata, minimize storage writes, batch loops.
  
• Pack variables/document changes for clarity.
  
• Use events over storage when logic allows.
  
• Assembly only for hotspots—always document.
  
• Optimization must never compromise maintainability.
  
  

Practice Exercise

Scenario:
You are writing a voting contract for a DAO. Stakeholders want low gas fees, but audits must remain simple.

Tasks:

1. Implement naive contract with mappings for votes and storage-heavy logic.
   
2. Optimize:
   
   • Use calldata for voter lists.
     
   • Pack variables into one storage slot.
     
   • Replace redundant storage writes with a single final write.
     
   • Emit events for logging vote details instead of extra mappings.
     
3. Profile gas costs with Hardhat Gas Reporter. Compare naive vs optimized.
   
4. Add comments explaining each optimization and why it’s safe.
   
5. Deliver results: gas per vote reduced by 25%, codebase still readable and testable.
   
6. Write a one-paragraph summary for stakeholders: “This saves $X per 1M votes, keeps audit cost low, and ensures maintainability.”
   
   

Deliverable:
A repo with naive and optimized contracts, gas usage report, and stakeholder summary showing how gas optimization and maintainability coexist.