Blockchain Development Frameworks Review - Real Developer Experience

The Great Migration Nobody Talks About

Here's what actually happened: Foundry performance numbers started getting too good to ignore in 2024, but most teams were hesitant to migrate until they had no choice. I watched this shift happen across multiple projects - first the individual devs started experimenting, then entire teams made the jump.

Last year, I was maintaining a DeFi protocol that took about 6-7 minutes to run its test suite on Hardhat. I had this whole fucking routine - start the tests, make coffee, check Slack, sometimes answer emails, and usually the tests were still running when I got back. When I finally said fuck it and ported everything to Foundry, same exact tests ran in 31 seconds. I timed it. Point is, I stopped making coffee during test runs.

The 2024 Solidity Developer Survey confirmed this trend - Foundry overtook Hardhat as the most popular framework with 51.1% of developers, marking a massive shift from JavaScript to Rust-based tooling.

Why Teams Actually Switch (Spoiler: It's Not What You Think)

Everyone talks about Foundry's speed, but that wasn't the killer feature for our team. It was writing tests in Solidity instead of JavaScript. No more context switching between languages. No more wrestling with ethers.js type definitions that never match reality.

Hardhat still owns enterprise for one reason: most senior devs learned JavaScript before they learned Rust. The JavaScript ecosystem is massive, battle-tested, and boring. That's actually a feature when you're managing serious money.

But here's the thing nobody mentions in those framework comparison blogs: Truffle is fucking dead. I've seen exactly zero new projects start with Truffle in 2025. ConsenSys officially sunset the entire Truffle Suite in 2024, and any dev still recommending it is either maintaining legacy code or hasn't kept up. It's in maintenance mode, which is enterprise-speak for "we're not fixing anything unless it's literally on fire."

The Multi-Chain Reality Check

Multi-chain support sounds great until you actually try to deploy to five different networks and realize each one has its own quirks:

• Polygon gas estimation is weird
• Arbitrum has different precompiles
• Optimism sometimes doesn't propagate transactions
• Avalanche C-Chain acts like Ethereum until it doesn't

Foundry handles most of these better than Hardhat, but you'll still spend weekends debugging shit like "transaction underpriced" errors that only happen on Arbitrum during high gas periods. That specific error cost us a 6-hour debugging session before we realized their gas estimation is just broken sometimes.

The Solana Exception

Anchor isn't competing with Ethereum frameworks - it's solving completely different problems. Solana's account model is so alien compared to Ethereum that you need specialized tools. I spent three months learning Anchor and it felt like learning blockchain development all over again.

The performance claims are real - Solana can actually handle real user volume. But the developer experience is rough. Error messages are cryptic, debugging tools are limited, and the whole ecosystem feels like Ethereum circa 2018. Getting started with Anchor requires a completely different mental model.

What This Means for Your Next Project

Choose Foundry if you're starting fresh and can handle Rust. Choose Hardhat if you have JavaScript developers who need to ship fast. Skip Truffle unless you're maintaining legacy code.

That's it. Everything else is overthinking.

Hardhat: The Safe Boring Choice (That Sometimes Breaks)

I've shipped five production contracts with Hardhat, and it's reliable until it isn't. The JavaScript ecosystem is comforting when you're debugging at 3am, but it's painfully slow once you've experienced better.

What Actually Works:

• Hardhat Network fork testing is solid. I can debug against mainnet state without spending actual ETH.
• Error messages are actually helpful. When your contract reverts, you get stack traces instead of cryptic EVM errors.
• The plugin ecosystem saves time: gas reporting, contract verification, deployment scripts all work out of the box.

What Drives Me Fucking Crazy:

• Test suites that take 5-8 minutes when the same tests run in 30 seconds on Foundry. I've literally gone to take a piss and come back to tests still running.
• Installing dependencies pulls in 400MB of node_modules for a hello world contract. My SSD cries every time.
• Debugging complex interactions across multiple contracts becomes an exercise in patience. You set a breakpoint, make coffee, check Twitter, and maybe the debugger has stepped to the next line.

Bottom line: Use Hardhat if you have a team of web2 developers who need to ship quickly. Skip it if you care about iteration speed or want to actually enjoy the development process.

Foundry: Fast, Brutal, and Worth the Pain

Foundry broke my brain in the best way. After three months of using it, going back to Hardhat feels like coding in molasses.

What Made Me Switch:

• Tests written in Solidity instead of JavaScript. No more type definition hell.
• Fuzz testing that actually found bugs in production code.
• `forge create` deploys contracts faster than Hardhat can compile them.

The Rust Tax:
Installing Foundry on an M1 Mac took me two hours of Stack Overflow hell. I got errors like "could not compile forge due to 18 previous errors" with zero useful information. The error messages assume you know Rust - shit like "expected struct foundry_evm::executor::fork::CreateFork, found ()" which tells you absolutely nothing if you've never touched Rust. The toolchain is alien if you're coming from JavaScript, and the docs assume you understand concepts like "target triples" and "crate features."

Why It's Worth It:
My test-driven development loop went from 30 seconds to 3 seconds. When you're iterating on complex logic, that difference is the difference between flow state and frustration.

Migration Reality Check:
Porting a medium-sized Hardhat project to Foundry took me a weekend. Most of that time was rewriting JavaScript tests in Solidity. Worth every hour.

Truffle: The Framework Time Forgot

Truffle was my first framework back in 2020. It taught me smart contract development, then I outgrew it.

Why It Still Exists:

• Enterprise teams scared of change
• Legacy codebases that would take months to migrate
• Developers who learned it in 2018 and never looked back

Why You Shouldn't Use It:

• Slower than Hardhat, which is already slow
• Plugin ecosystem is stagnant
• The community moved on to better tools

Exception: If you're maintaining existing Truffle code, don't migrate unless you have a compelling reason. Migration risk usually outweighs the benefits.

Anchor: Solana's Necessary Evil

Anchor isn't comparable to Ethereum frameworks - it's solving different problems on a different blockchain with a completely different programming model.

Why It's Necessary:
Solana's account model is insane. Without Anchor's abstractions, you'd spend months understanding program-derived addresses and rent-exempt accounts before writing your first smart contract.

What I Wish Someone Told Me Before I Wasted Three Months:

• Learning Anchor is learning Solana development from scratch. Your Ethereum knowledge doesn't transfer. It's like knowing how to drive a car and then trying to pilot a helicopter.
• Error messages are fucking terrible. Custom program error: 0x1 tells you nothing. I once spent 8 hours debugging what turned out to be a missing account in the instruction, and the error was just "Access violation in heap 4."
• Debugging requires understanding the Solana runtime, not just your program logic. You need to know about rent, account sizes, program-derived addresses, and about 50 other concepts before you can write "Hello World."

The Ecosystem Reality:
Solana can actually handle user volume that would make Ethereum cry. But the developer tooling feels like Ethereum in 2018. You're trading developer experience for runtime performance.

Should You Use It?
Only if you're building something that needs Solana's throughput and you're prepared for a three-month learning curve. Otherwise, stick to Ethereum and accepted the gas costs.

Stop Overthinking This

I get it. You want to make the "right" choice. You've read twelve blog posts, three Twitter threads, and asked ChatGPT five times. They all have different opinions. Here's the truth: the framework won't make or break your project. Shipping will. I've seen perfect Hardhat setups with dead products and messy Foundry codebases that handle millions in TVL.

The Actually Useful Decision Tree

Are you a JavaScript developer who wants to ship something this quarter?
→ Use Hardhat. It's boring, it works, and you already know the ecosystem.

Are you building something where test speed actually matters?
→ Use Foundry. Yes, you'll spend a weekend learning Rust tooling. It's worth it.

Are you maintaining existing Truffle code?
→ Don't migrate unless it's actually causing problems. Migration risk usually outweighs benefits.

Are you building on Solana?
→ Use Anchor. There are no alternatives.

That's it. Everything else is bikeshedding.

Budget and Timeline Reality Checks

Tiny team, tight deadline: Hardhat. The JavaScript ecosystem means you can hire contractors who can contribute immediately.

Well-funded team, 18-month runway: Foundry. You can afford the learning curve and the productivity gains compound.

Enterprise with compliance requirements: Hardhat. Better audit trail, more mature security tooling, established processes.

The Migration Conversation

I've had this conversation with ten different teams this year:

CTO: "Should we migrate to Foundry?"

Me: "How long do your tests take?"

CTO: "About two minutes."

Me: "Don't migrate. Spend that time building features."

Migration makes sense when test execution time is a bottleneck. If your team is already productive, don't fix what isn't broken.

Hiring Considerations Nobody Mentions

Choosing Foundry means your job postings need to mention Rust experience. That cuts your candidate pool by 70%, but the devs you do find will probably know what they're doing. I posted a Foundry position last month - got 12 applications. Same role mentioning Hardhat gets 80+ applications.

Choosing Hardhat means you can hire any decent web developer and train them on blockchain concepts. Larger pool, easier ramp-up, but also more people who think they can learn smart contracts in a weekend and then accidentally drain your treasury.

Factor this into your decision if you're planning to scale the team.

The Frameworks People Don't Talk About

Remix: Great for learning and quick prototypes. Terrible for anything with more than three files. Don't build real applications in a browser IDE unless you enjoy pain.

Brownie: Python developers love it because it doesn't require learning JavaScript. If your entire team is Python devs who refuse to touch JS, it's worth considering. Otherwise, you're choosing a tool used by 5% of the ecosystem.

Embark: Was promising in 2021, but development basically stopped. Choosing Embark in 2025 is like choosing Betamax in 1985 - technically it works, but good luck finding support.

What I'd Choose Today

If I were starting a new DeFi protocol today with $2M in funding and a six-month runway, I'd use Foundry. The test-driven development loop is too good to give up.

If I were consulting for an enterprise client who needed something shipped in three months with a mixed team of web developers, I'd use Hardhat. Lower risk, faster ramp-up, proven track record.

If I were exploring Solana because Ethereum fees were killing my use case, I'd use Anchor and plan for a three-month learning curve.

Stop Reading Tutorials, Start Building

The best framework is the one you actually ship projects with. Pick one, stick with it for six months, then evaluate. The ecosystem changes fast enough that your decision today might be wrong next year anyway.

What matters is building something users want, not using the perfect development framework.