chore: refactor token examples

[MonaaEid]

Description:
This PR refactors the following example scripts to improve readability, modularity, and developer experience:

• token_delete.py

• token_dissociate.py

• token_freeze.py

• token_unfreeze.py

• token_mint_fungible.py

• token_mint_non_fungible.py

• topic_create.py

Related issue(s):

Fixes #370

Checklist

• Extracted reusable logic into helper functions (e.g., setup_client(), generate_supply_key(), create_new_token()).
• Ensure that scripts still produce the same output as before.
• Documented (Code comments)
• Tested

[exploreriii]

Hi, this is going great! You've mostly achieved all that was requested, would you like to add a little more detail to the key steps make it easier to understand and perhaps add some checks if useful?

[MonaaEid]

@exploreriii I have done the requirements, if there is anything I should change please let me know

[exploreriii]

Thank you for all this
Could I ask you in the final functions to add a step by step?

e.g.
def token_associate...
"""

1. Create an account that will associate tokens
2. Create the tokens to associate to the account
3. Associate the tokens to the account
4. Verify the tokens are both associated to the account

It is not necessary but will help to improve the clarity for users

Also maybe some additional checks could be useful but not necessary, mentioned above

[exploreriii]

Hi @MonaaEid . This is generally looking really great. I've taken a first pass through these recent changes - I need to look at it in more detail tomorrow or soon.
Meanwhile I've added a couple of ideas if you think they are worth pushing forward

[exploreriii]

please let me know when this is ready to review again

[MonaaEid]

Hello@exploreriii , I will.
I haven't started on this updates yet but soon I will finish this.

[exploreriii]

No problem, thanks for the update. Don't want to leave you hanging in case you were expecting a review.

[exploreriii]

Hi @MonaaEid we have had a lot of PR's relating to examples but I have tried to keep the ones you are working on untouched. I think I created an issue on topic_create which conflits with yours, sorry.
please confirm when you are planning to finish this, else I would like to release these issues.

[MonaaEid]

@exploreriii could you please review?

[exploreriii]

Yes, thank you! If any other issue interest you in the meantime, please feel free to take it on while I finish reviewing this

[nadineloepfe]

could be nice if we'd have generate() and then in there an env var either setting it to ED25519 or ECDSA

[MonaaEid]

Is this ok?

 supply_key = PrivateKey.generate(os.getenv('HSDK_KEY_TYPE', 'ed25519'))

[nadineloepfe]

yes, just maybe just KEY_TYPE. but else perfect:)

[nadineloepfe]

would be great if we could implement this across the board

[exploreriii]

@MonaaEid thank you SO MUCH for this!
I see you added queries to verify, plus improved the existing scripts quite a bit

Please rebase then let's follow up with Nadine to see any final changes

[exploreriii]

I'm just noting the solo checks didn't run. Hopefully they re-trigger on rebasing

[exploreriii]

Need you to rebase, your changelog and examples/topic_create.py have conflicts.
This suggests your main is not up to date.

try
git checkout main
git fetch upstream
git pull upstream main
git checkout your-branch
git rebase main -S

then read merge_conflicts.md!

[exploreriii]

I'm not familiar on the key generation issues, but did see other sdks start to recommend to not use ed25519

[exploreriii]

Sorry @MonaaEid you have two commits (near the start) that are not marked as verified, see the commits tab please.
You can pick at these commits and edit to sign them
else you can try to soft revert and re-sign

[nadineloepfe]

@MonaaEid : Hi there, are you still working on this issue? If so, do you require help with the signing of commits? Thanks