Solidity Versus Rust For Smart Contract Development. Which Should You Pick?
Before we "delve" into anything, I should probably mention that I do not use Rust, and am mostly conversant with Solidity.
However, there are times when the thought of picking up Rust as a second blockchain development language comes to mind, and I wonder what "powers" I may have if I listened to this voice in my head and indeed went for Rust.
And so I have done what any moderately curious person would do. I went digging and found a few things.
In this article, I share the things I have found:
The use cases of both languages,
Syntax
Learning curve
Background of both
And the community support for both
Without further ado, here is everything I have learned so far.
Introduction
Smart contract development is a critical aspect of decentralized application (dApp) development. Ethereum, the second-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, pioneered the concept of smart contracts.
Since then, other blockchain platforms have adopted smart contract functionality including the Near protocol, Solana and Polkadot (which all use Rust as their native smart contract development language).
In essence, Solidity and Rust are two of the most popular programming languages for smart contract development. Others include Vyper, Go and Java (but more of that in a later article).
In this article, I will attempt to compare Solidity and Rust under a few short subtopics and help you decide which language to pick.
Background:
Before diving into the comparison, it is essential to understand the basics of smart contracts.
A smart contract is a self-executing computer program that automatically enforces the rules and conditions of a contract. These programs run on a blockchain network and are almost 100% safe, secure and tamper-proof.
In simple terms, a smart contract is like a digital "if-then" statement. They typically contain a set of rules and conditions that are programmed into the code, and when certain conditions are met, the contract automatically executes its pre-defined actions.
Ethereum was the first blockchain platform to introduce smart contract functionality. Solidity is the primary language used for smart contract development on the Ethereum platform, along with others like Vyper.
Rust, on the other hand, is a relatively new language that is gaining popularity for smart contract development. And as mentioned earlier, it is used mostly in the Near, Polkadot and Solana protocols.
But what do their syntaxes look like?
Syntax:
Syntax is an important consideration when making a choice like this, especially if you're a beginner. Solidity is similar to JavaScript. This means that if you already were familiar with Javascript, you may find it easier to jump on Solidity.
Rust, on the other hand, is a systems programming language that is miles more complex than Solidity.
Consider this example of a simple Solidity contract:
pragma solidity ^0.8.0;
contract SimpleContract {
uint256 public num;
constructor(uint256 _num) {
num = _num;
}
function add(uint256 _addNum) public {
num += _addNum;
}
}
The first line of the code is the Solidity version pragma, which tells the compiler what version of Solidity to use. In this case, it specifies version 0.8.0.
The second line declares the contract's name. This contract is called "SimpleContract".
The line after that declares a public variable called "num" of type "uint256" (unsigned integer with 256 bits). The "public" keyword means that this variable is readable from outside the contract.
After that, we have the contract's constructor function, which initializes the "num" variable with the value passed in as an argument.
And then, we have the public function called "add", which takes an argument "_addNum" of type "uint256". The function adds the value of "_addNum" to the "num" variable.
So in summary, this Solidity smart contract initializes a public variable "num" with a value passed in as an argument to the constructor function. It also provides a public function "add" that adds a value to "num".
For contrast, here's an example of a Rust smart contract I had translated from the Solidity contract above:
#![no_std]
use ink_lang::contract;
contract! {
struct SimpleContract {
num: i32,
}
impl SimpleContract {
#[ink(constructor)]
pub fn new(num: i32) -> Self {
Self { num }
}
#[ink(message)]
pub fn add(&mut self, add_num: i32) {
self.num += add_num;
}
#[ink(message)]
pub fn get_num(&self) -> i32 {
self.num
}
}
}
I have no idea how this works, but it's a direct translation of the solidity contract above. Meaning they both do the same thing.
As you can see, the syntax of Rust is more complex than that of Solidity. Rust uses a macro-based syntax to define smart contracts, which may be unfamiliar to developers new to the language.
Security:
Security is a crucial aspect of smart contract development. Smart contracts can contain large amounts of value, making them attractive targets for attackers. A simple mistake or vulnerability in how a smart contract is written can lead to billions of dollars going down the drain.
Yes, security is a big issue.
It may be worth mentioning that Solidity has been around for longer than Rust, and has a more mature security ecosystem. It even contains features like modifiers and events that boost the security and gas-effectiveness of smart contracts.
Rust, on the other hand, is a systems programming language that prioritizes security. Rust's type system prevents common security vulnerabilities like buffer overflows and null pointer dereferences.
So which is the better language in terms of security? Definitely Rust, And I'll tell you why.
Both Solidity and Rust have features that make them suitable for writing secure smart contracts, and both languages have been used successfully for this purpose. However, Rust has some features that give it an advantage in terms of security.
One of the key advantages of Rust is its memory safety guarantees. Rust is designed to prevent common programming errors such as buffer overflows and null pointer dereferences that can lead to security vulnerabilities. Rust's ownership and borrowing model ensures that memory is managed safely and prevents certain types of bugs that can lead to memory corruption and other security issues.
Solidity, on the other hand, is not as strong on memory safety. Solidity is based on C++ and has some of the same memory management challenges as its mother language, including the potential for buffer overflows and other memory-related vulnerabilities.
Another advantage of Rust is its focus on thread safety. Rust is designed to make it easy to write code that is thread-safe, which can help prevent security vulnerabilities such as race conditions and deadlocks that can arise in concurrent programming.
Solidity does not have the same level of focus on thread safety, and writing thread-safe code in Solidity can be more challenging.
Overall, while both Solidity and Rust can be used to write secure smart contracts, Rust's memory safety and thread safety features give it an advantage in terms of security. However, it's worth noting that the security of a smart contract depends on more than just the language it is written in. The security of the underlying blockchain network and the way the smart contract is designed and implemented are also important factors to consider.
Do you see why Rust takes the lead in this category?
Development Environment:
The development environment for smart contract development is also essential. The development environment is an important factor to consider when comparing Solidity and Rust for smart contract development because it can have a significant impact on the productivity and efficiency of developers.
A good development environment can provide tools and features that make it easier to write, test, and deploy smart contracts. This can include features such as syntax highlighting, code completion, debugging, and integration with testing frameworks and deployment tools.
Solidity has a relatively mature development ecosystem, with several popular development environments available, including Remix and Truffle. These tools provide a range of features to help developers write, test, and deploy Solidity smart contracts, and they are widely used in the Ethereum community.
Rust, on the other hand, has a less mature development ecosystem for smart contract development. While there are some tools available, such as the ink! smart contract framework and the cargo-contract tool for deploying contracts, these tools are still in development and may not have the same level of features and support as the Solidity development ecosystem.
In addition, the development environment can also impact the learning curve for developers. If a developer is already familiar with a particular development environment, they may find it easier to learn and work with a language that is supported by that environment. For example, if a developer is already familiar with the Remix development environment, they may find it easier to work with Solidity than with Rust, even if Rust is a better fit for their project.
Overall, the development environment is an important factor to consider, as it can impact the productivity, efficiency, and learning curve for developers.
And as far as this category goes, Solidity takes the lead.
Deployment:
When it comes to ease of smart contract deployment, Solidity and Rust have different strengths and weaknesses.
Solidity has a relatively mature deployment ecosystem, with several popular deployment tools available such as Remix, Truffle, and Hardhat. These tools provide a range of features to make it easier for developers to deploy Solidity smart contracts, such as automated contract testing, contract compilation, and deployment management.
Personally, I'm in love with this aspect.
In addition, Solidity smart contracts can be deployed to multiple blockchain networks, including Ethereum, Binance Smart Chain, and Polygon, among others. This allows developers to choose the network that best suits their needs and the needs of their project.
Rust, on the other hand, has a less mature deployment ecosystem for smart contract development. While there are some tools available, such as the ink! smart contract framework and the cargo-contract tool for deploying contracts, these tools are still in development and may not have the same level of features and support as the Solidity deployment ecosystem.
In addition, Rust smart contracts are currently only supported on the Substrate network, which is a blockchain framework for building customized blockchain networks. This means that developers who want to deploy Rust smart contracts may need to invest more time and effort into setting up and configuring their blockchain network.
Overall, Solidity currently has a more mature deployment ecosystem and can be easier to deploy to multiple blockchain networks. Rust's deployment ecosystem is still developing and is currently limited to the Substrate network. Therefore, in terms of ease of deployment, Solidity may be a better choice for most projects.
Community:
The communities surrounding Solidity and Rust are an essential consideration for developers. Solidity has a larger community than Rust, with more resources and tutorials available. Rust's community is growing rapidly, and the language's focus on security and performance makes it attractive to developers.
Learning Curve:
The learning curve is an important consideration when choosing a programming language for smart contract development. Solidity has a low learning curve for developers who are familiar with JavaScript. However, developers new to JavaScript may find Solidity challenging to learn.
Rust has a steeper learning curve than Solidity, as it is a systems programming language that requires a strong understanding of computer science concepts. Rust is not as widely used in the blockchain space as Solidity, so there may be a shortage of Rust experts to consult for help.
Which Should You Pick?
So, which language should you pick? The answer depends on your requirements and preferences. If you're already familiar with JavaScript, Solidity is an excellent choice. Solidity has a well-established ecosystem and is widely used in the blockchain space.
If you prioritize security and performance, Rust may be a better choice. Rust's type system makes it difficult to write vulnerable code, and its focus on performance makes it attractive for complex smart contracts. However, Rust has a steeper learning curve than Solidity, and its ecosystem is still maturing.
Conclusion:
Smart contract development is a critical aspect of dApp development, and choosing the right programming language is essential.
However, while Solidity has a low learning curve, a mature ecosystem, and a focus on security, Rust prioritizes security and performance but has a steeper learning curve and a less mature ecosystem. It is important to consider your requirements and preferences before choosing a language.
But as for me, I've decided I'm sticking with Solidity. For personal reasons.