Introduction
This review delves into Scroll, a Layer 2 (L2) solution meticulously crafted to augment Ethereum’s functionality. It unbiasedly evaluates various aspects, including innovation, architecture, code quality, product roadmap, usability, and team expertise.
Innovation
Scroll is a trailblazer in extending Ethereum’s capabilities through zero-knowledge technology while ensuring compatibility with Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). This innovation permits existing Ethereum applications to transition to Scroll with minimal effort and cost, leveraging bytecode-level compatibility.
Scroll Architecture
The architecture of Scroll is a tripartite structure:
- Scroll Node: This component constructs L2 blocks, linking L1 and L2 and managing their interactions.
- Roller Network generates zkEVM validity proofs, ensuring transactional accuracy within the zkRollup framework.
- Rollup and Bridge Contracts: These ensure data availability and validate zkEVM proofs, enabling asset transfers between Ethereum and Scroll.
- The sequencer, built on Go-Ethereum (Geth), is pivotal in transaction sequencing within the network.
Code Quality
Scroll’s code base is of superior quality, reflecting robust development practices. It employs “Halo 2,” a Plonk-based proof system, for efficient on-chain proof verification. This choice exhibits a strategic approach to optimize performance and scalability.
Product Roadmap
Scroll has successfully transitioned to mainnet, indicating significant progress in its roadmap. However, the detailed future trajectory of product development remains to be elaborately outlined.
Usability
With an arbitrary message-passing bridge, Scroll facilitates smooth token transfers and dapp communications across Layer 1 and 2. This feature enhances its usability, making it a versatile platform for developers and users.
Team
The development team behind Scroll comprises highly skilled and experienced professionals. Their expertise in Ethereum and blockchain technology is evident in Scroll’s sophisticated design and implementation.
Conclusion
Scroll emerges as a potent L2 solution, significantly scaling and fortifying Ethereum’s capabilities. Its emphasis on zero-knowledge technology, EVM compatibility, and a robust architectural framework positions it as a promising contender in blockchain scalability. The project’s success and future potential are underscored by its impressive code quality and the expertise of its development team.
Initial Screening | |||
Keep researching | |||
Does this project need to use blockchain technology? | Yes | ||
Can this project be realized? | Yes | ||
Is there a viable use case for this project? | Yes | ||
Is the project protected from commonly known attacks? | Yes | ||
Are there no careless errors in the whitepaper? | Yes | ||
Project Technology Score | |||
Description | Scorecard | ||
Innovation (Out Of 11) | 11 | ||
How have similar projects performed? | Good | 2 | |
Are there too many innovations? | Regular | 2 | |
Percentage of crypto users that will use the project? | Over 11% | 5 | |
Is the project unique? | Yes | 2 | |
Architecture (Out of 12) | 9 | ||
Overall feeling after reading whitepaper? | Good | 2 | |
Resistance to possible attacks? | Good | 2 | |
Complexity of the architecture? | Not too complex | 2 | |
Time taken to understand the architecture? | 20 – 50 min | 1 | |
Overall feeling about the architecture after deeper research? | Medium | 2 | |
Has the project been hacked ? | No | 0 | |
Code Quality (out of 15) | 15 | ||
Is the project open source? | Yes | 2 | |
Does the project use good code like C,C++, Rust, Erlang, Ruby, etc? | Yes | 2 | |
Could the project use better programming languages? | No | 0 | |
Github number of lines? | More than 10K | 1 | |
Github commits per month? | More than 10 | 2 | |
What is the quality of the code? | Good | 2 | |
How well is the code commented? | Outstanding | 2 | |
Overall quality of the test coverage? | Outstanding | 2 | |
Overall quality of the maintainability index? | Outstanding | 2 | |
When Mainnet (out of 5) | 5 | ||
When does the mainnet come out? | Mainnet Ready | 5 | |
Usability for Infrastructure Projects (out of 5) | 5 | ||
Is it easy to use for the end customer? | Yes | 5 | |
Team (out of 7) | 7 | ||
Number of active developers? | 5+ | 2 | |
Developers average Git Background? | Senior | 2 | |
Developers coding style? | Outstanding | 3 | |
Total Score (out of 55) | 52 | ||
Percentage Score | |||
Innovation | 20.00% | ||
Architecture | 16.36% | ||
Code Quality | 27.27% | ||
Mainnet | 9.09% | ||
Usability | 9.09% | ||
Team | 12.73% | ||
Total | 94.55% |