07-tendermint: add missing interface check for ConsensusState

[crodriguezvega]

Description

closes: #XXXX

Commit Message / Changelog Entry

N/A

see the guidelines for commit messages. (view raw markdown for examples)

---

Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.

• Targeted PR against correct branch (see CONTRIBUTING.md).
• Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.
• Code follows the module structure standards and Go style guide.
• Wrote unit and integration tests.
• Updated relevant documentation (docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/).
• Added relevant godoc comments.
• Provide a commit message to be used for the changelog entry in the PR description for review.
• Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer.
• Review Codecov Report in the comment section below once CI passes.

[DimitrisJim]

lgtm.

I see there's two conflicting styles for this, one using a nil pointer and the other using the address of an empty struct. Though both can be used, I'd guess a nil pointer is slightly more efficient since it doesn't require default initialization for any potential struct members.

Should we open an issue to have all these use the same form of assertion?

[crodriguezvega]

I see there's two conflicting styles for this, one using a nil pointer and the other using the address of an empty struct.

Yes, indeed; you're right!

Should we open an issue to have all these use the same form of assertion?

Sounds good to me. I would also be fine opening directly a PR. :)

[DimitrisJim]

I would also be fine opening directly a PR. :)

Will do, sharpening my greping regex-fu.