should `MinerAPI.getXXXX` be `view`?

[hcheng826]

Or this function is expected to change state?

Including getOwner, getSectorSize, getAvailableBalance, getVestingFunds and so on.

:link: zboto Link

[maciejwitowski]

These functions aren't expected to modify the state. They all past the static_call = true flag. Eg here (the last argument).

[hcheng826]

Thanks for the reply! Then shouldn't it be marked as view? Also I tried to deploy this contract to testnet and call the function. Looks like it cost gas to do so. Is this expected?

The transaction: https://hyperspace.filfox.info/en/message/bafy2bzaced4775cvskrqjgr6tlfjjwmmb37l7gbniotyf3h7iem5viasncbzy

[maciejwitowski]

Yeah, this is tricky. You can see the explanation in this Slack thread, especially

solc's mutability checker sees a "delegatecall" and decides the method can't be view, because a delegatecall might be able to change state.

and

If you want to mark those methods view, you have to fool the mutability checker.

Here is the example of "fooling the mutability checker".

[rllola]

I would not recommend doing this hack in your code to fool the checker. But indeed we can't put view on functions because all the call use DelegateCall opcode.

And to answer your second question, simply getting a value cost gas. In the PR you can see a gas consumption table (https://github.com/Zondax/filecoin-solidity/pull/358#issuecomment-1473998338). The values are taken from running the contract in a local fvm.