Does the Send Function Have the Same Gas Limitations as Transfer ? ⎊ Path

Does the Send Function Have the Same Gas Limitations as Transfer ?

Yes, the send function also forwards a fixed gas stipend of 2,300, making it similar to transfer in terms of reentrancy prevention. However, send differs in that it does not automatically revert the transaction upon failure.

It returns a boolean success value, requiring the developer to explicitly check this value and handle the failure, which is an additional security consideration.

Why Is the 2,300 Gas Limit Sometimes Considered a Design Flaw?

Can a Contract’s Fallback Function Intentionally Consume More than 2,300 Gas?

How Is the Concept of Error Checking Applied in Options Trading (E.g. Contract Specification Validation)?

How Does a ‘Revert’ Transaction on a DEX Differ from a Simple Cancellation on a CEX?

What Is the Difference between Require() and Checking the Call Return Value?

How Does a Non-Reverting External Call Return Value Affect Contract Security?

How Do Gas Limitations Prevent Reentrancy in Some Cases?

What Is the Difference between an Explicit and an Implicit Contract?