SingleStaking Code Style Findings

SSG-01C: Inefficient Code Structure

Type	Severity	Location
Gas Optimization		SingleStaking.sol:L714-L725

Description:

The referenced if-else block within the StakingSingleRewards::withdraw function will repeat the same statements across the code branches except for a single require check.

Example:

Copy
714if (isLocked) {
715    require(block.timestamp > periodFinish, "Period is not finished");
716    _totalSupply = _totalSupply.sub(amount);
717    _balances[msg.sender] = _balances[msg.sender].sub(amount);
718    stakingToken.safeTransfer(msg.sender, amount);
719    emit Withdrawn(msg.sender, amount);
720} else {
721    _totalSupply = _totalSupply.sub(amount);
722    _balances[msg.sender] = _balances[msg.sender].sub(amount);
723    stakingToken.safeTransfer(msg.sender, amount);
724    emit Withdrawn(msg.sender, amount);
725}

Recommendation:

We advise the code to instead perform the require check within the existing if clause, the else clause to be removed, and the remaining statements in the if clause to be relocated outside of it and specifically after it.

Alleviation (6513a21a002d422e298719b22f73a4559dfd4663):

The code was optimized per our recommendation, significantly reducing the bytecode size of the contract.

SSG-02C: Repetitive Value Literal

Type	Severity	Location
Code Style		SingleStaking.sol:L680, L689

Description:

The linked value literal is repeated across the codebase multiple times.

Example:

Copy
680.mul(1e18)

Recommendation:

We advise it to be set to a constant variable instead, optimizing the legibility of the codebase.

In case the constant has already been declared, we advise it to be properly re-used across the code.

Alleviation (6513a21a002d422e298719b22f73a4559dfd4663):

The referenced value literal PRECISION has been properly relocated to a contract-level constant declaration labelled 1e18, optimizing the code's legibility.