Smart Contract Framework Decision Guide

Framework Status and Viability

Active Frameworks

• Hardhat: Actively maintained by Nomic Foundation, ~362k weekly downloads
• Foundry: Growing adoption, backed by Paradigm, CLI-only distribution

Dead Frameworks (Do Not Use)

• Truffle: Officially discontinued September 2023 by ConsenSys, no security updates
• Brownie: Abandoned by maintainers, community moved to other tools

Critical Decision Matrix

Framework	Status	Performance	Learning Curve	Team Fit
Hardhat	Production Ready	Baseline	Easy for JS devs	JavaScript/TypeScript teams
Foundry	Production Ready	2-3x faster compilation, significantly faster tests	Steep (Rust tooling)	Performance-focused teams
Truffle	DEAD	N/A	N/A	Migrate immediately
Brownie	DEAD	N/A	N/A	Migrate immediately

Performance Specifications

Compilation Speed

• Hardhat: Baseline performance
• Foundry: 2-3x faster compilation (machine-dependent)
• Breaking Point: Large codebases reveal dramatic differences

Test Execution

• Hardhat: Minutes for large test suites
• Foundry: Seconds for same test suites
• Memory Usage: Hardhat ~250MB, Foundry ~150MB
• Real Impact: Developers run tests locally with Foundry, avoid with Hardhat

Critical Failure Modes

Hardhat Breaking Points

• Node.js Version Issues: Node 16→18 upgrades break everything
• Specific Error: ERR_OSSL_EVP_UNSUPPORTED with Node 18.2.0 (use 18.1.0)
• Plugin Dependencies: Major version upgrades break plugins
• Production Discovery: Gas estimation differences between simulation and mainnet

Foundry Breaking Points

• Rust Toolchain Updates: Can break compilation pipeline
• Learning Curve: Steep for JavaScript-only teams
• Ecosystem: Smaller plugin ecosystem vs Hardhat

Migration Horror Stories

• Time Investment: Simple projects 1-2 weeks, medium 1 month, large 2-3 months
• Hidden Complexity: Old config files from 2021 still matter
• Gas Estimation: Truffle→Hardhat migration revealed different gas simulation behavior
• CI/CD: Always takes longer than expected

Resource Requirements

Time Investment

• New Project Setup: Hardhat few minutes, Foundry instant
• Migration Effort: Add 50% buffer time to estimates
• Team Onboarding: Hardhat immediate for JS teams, Foundry requires Rust tooling learning

Expertise Requirements

• Hardhat: JavaScript/TypeScript knowledge sufficient
• Foundry: Requires command-line comfort, Rust ecosystem familiarity
• Both: Solidity knowledge essential

Maintenance Costs

• Hardhat: Plugin compatibility checking on upgrades
• Foundry: Rust toolchain maintenance
• Dead Frameworks: Security vulnerability exposure

Configuration That Actually Works

Hardhat Production Settings

• Test with mainnet forks before deployment
• Pin plugin versions in production
• Use Node 18.1.0 (avoid 18.2.0)
• Memory allocation: ~250MB minimum

Foundry Production Settings

• Install via: curl -L https://foundry.paradigm.xyz | bash
• Memory allocation: ~150MB typical
• Rust toolchain stability monitoring required

Hybrid Approach

• Plugin: @nomicfoundation/hardhat-foundry
• Trade-off: Complexity overhead vs tool benefits
• Reality: Usually not worth maintenance burden

Decision Criteria

Choose Hardhat If:

• Team knows JavaScript/TypeScript
• Need extensive plugin ecosystem
• Building full-stack dApps
• Stability > performance
• Enterprise support requirements

Choose Foundry If:

• Test speed is critical
• Prefer Solidity testing over JavaScript
• Building DeFi protocols
• Team comfortable with Rust tooling
• Fuzzing/property testing requirements

Force Migration If:

• Currently using Truffle (security risk)
• Currently using Brownie (abandoned)
• Any framework without active maintenance

Critical Warnings

What Documentation Won't Tell You

• Truffle: Still appears in tutorials but is security risk
• Node Compatibility: Always check before upgrading
• Gas Estimation: Different between frameworks and mainnet
• Plugin Ecosystem: Can break on framework upgrades

Breaking Points and Failure Modes

• UI Performance: Testing breaks at ~1000 spans, making debugging impossible
• Memory Leaks: Python frameworks especially problematic
• CI/CD Integration: Framework choice affects pipeline performance
• Team Velocity: Wrong choice impacts daily development speed

Support and Community Reality

Hardhat

• Community: Very active Discord, thousands of Stack Overflow answers
• Enterprise: Paid support available
• Documentation: Comprehensive and maintained
• Plugin Quality: High with active maintenance

Foundry

• Community: Growing but smaller than Hardhat
• Enterprise: Community support only
• Documentation: Excellent official docs
• Plugin Quality: Smaller ecosystem but high quality

Dead Frameworks

• Truffle: Legacy answers only, no new support
• Brownie: Ghost town community, outdated resources

Implementation Reality Check

What Actually Breaks in Production

• Default Settings: Often fail in production environments
• Version Mismatches: Node.js versions between development and deployment
• Test Coverage: Differences in gas reporting between frameworks
• Deployment Scripts: Environment variable handling varies

Migration Pain Points

• Breaking Changes: Major version upgrades require extensive testing
• Tool Integration: CI/CD pipelines need complete reconfiguration
• Team Training: Learning curve impacts delivery timelines
• Legacy Code: Old configuration files create unexpected dependencies

This guide provides operational intelligence for framework selection based on real production experience and documented failure modes.