fix: revise to call Begin/EndRecheck even though mem.Size() is 0

[jinsan-line]

Related with: https://github.com/line/link/issues/1151, #160

Description

W/ #160 CONTRACT, we need to call Begin/EndRecheck even though mem.Size() is 0. IMHO, it's conceptually expected behavior to call Begin/EndRecheck even though mem.Size() is 0. We could compare it w/ Begine/EndBlock that are called even though there is no deliverTx.

What I've got from the team

• Only when mem.config.Recheck is true, call Begin/EndRecheck.
  • Conceptually it's more acceptable and readable.
  • This approach could cause an issue if mem.config.Recheck is false but
    • W/o this change, there is already issues if mem.config.Recheck is false.
    • mem.config.Recheck is configured true for all phase and all chain.
    • We don't have any plan to set it false and also it seems to be almost impossible.
• Discuss more whether removing mem.config.Recheck or not w/ other issue/PR.

Need to discuss

• How about removing mem.config.Recheck to restrict misuse it?
  • ~~cosmos-sdk assumes that recheck is working in terms of managing account sequence. ~~
  • If we disable recheck, we might get problems related with account sequence.
  • The PR could look like weird because it calls Begin/EndRecheck even when mem.config.Recheck is false.
  • We actually need to call these even when mem.config.Recheck is false.

I'd like to hear the team's opinion.

---

For contributor use:

• Wrote tests
• Updated CHANGELOG_PENDING.md
• Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.
• Updated relevant documentation (docs/) and code comments
• Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer

[egonspace]

Would you explain why we should call BeginRecheckTx even when mem.size() is zero?

[kukugi]

LGTM 👍

[kukugi]

you can omit err because you define variable in return type. so it can be just return

[jinsan-line]

I'm trying to avoid naked return. cc: @wetcod

https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/CodeReviewComments#naked-returns

[egonspace]

LGTM

[jinsan-line]

Please could anyone review this PR? @tnasu @torao @kokeshiM0chi