We currently only support remote reads of the mutable state of a contract, but not of the immutable state (the contract parameters).

To support this we need the following:

• A syntax for contract parameters in address types. Contract parameters may have the same name as a field, so we need to be able to distinguish syntactically between a remote field and a remote contract parameter. One idea is ByStr20 with contract (x : Uint128) ... end.
• A syntax for remote reads of contract parameters. One idea is x <-& c.(x).
• On the C++ side, a way to fetch the value of a contract parameter. One suggestion is that we add contract parameters to the levelDB database with a suitable prefix (e.g., _cparam_<parameter name>), so that we can fetch them in the same way as we do for mutable fields, but that requires a database migration.