Improve wizard UI/UX [discussion]

[mariopil]

An idea came to my mind how we could improve the wizard UX. Instead of having a plain code display with a list of contracts to choose from, let's divide the wizard into 3 parts/dialogs:

1. Display a list of available contracts to choose from in a form of fancy icons - each contract would have its own unique colourful icon, plus a search bar would be available too.
2. User selects a contract and another dialog opens up with fields to setup the contract (e.g. ticket price for Lottery, min number of participants required, etc.)
3. Finally a code is generated which user could copy and invoke.

The generated code would be a new contract:

• UI creates new contract which uses the user selected one as a composition, e.g. Lottery
• it creates init function that initializes the Lottery.init() with the params selected by user
• generates additional functions for each Lottery contract function (create_lottery, play_lottery, etc.)
• generates hints for each function invoke (as it is now)

Everything would be fully automated, no hardcoding. The only thing we would have to stick with is the init function of the contract so that UI knows where to start from.

[eloylp]

I think this idea is somehow related with #104 . I see them as different tools from an user perspective:

• Users who know what they are looking for .The search engine will be helpful here.
• Users who dont know what they are looking for - A listing of contracts is better to showcase what are some of the posibilites.

So both kind of ways of accesing the data would be important IMO. How to combine them ? 🤔

[geofmureithi]

A listing of contracts is better to showcase what are some of the posibilites.

This works well. We have to figure out how to pull network contracts as code, unless we mean to import as an interface.
Maybe we can generate shell methods if its the former using FunctionSpec.