_Follow along with this video:_ --- ### selectWinner Should Follow CEI Taking a look at our next `@Audit` tag, this finding should be another quick one. We'd identified that the `selectWinner` function was another instance where PuppyRaffle isn't following CEI (Checks, Effects, Interactions). However, unlike our `reentrancy` situation, there doesn't seem to be a way to exploit it in `selectWinner`. As a result, this is going to be our 4th `informational`. ```` **Title:** [I-4] does not follow CEI, which is not a best practice It's best to keep code clean and follow CEI (Checks, Effects, Interactions). ```diff - (bool success,) = winner.call{value: prizePool}(""); - require(success, "PuppyRaffle: Failed to send prize pool to winner"); _safeMint(winner, tokenId); + (bool success,) = winner.call{value: prizePool}(""); + require(success, "PuppyRaffle: Failed to send prize pool to winner"); ``` ```` With `informational` findings, you may notice our write ups don't always strictly adhere to outlining things like impact. `Informational` findings are often very subjective in both their impact and their recommended fixes. What defines _clean code_, for example, may vary from developer to developer. With that said, this write up looks great. Let's move on to `weak randomness` next.