Software Engines

Per Wikipedia, a software engine is  defined as follows:  "A software engine is a core component of a complex software system." The article provides some examples of software engines such as: chess engines, database engine, search engine, reasoning engine, recommendations engine, and a handful of others.

Spiceworks defines a software engine thus which has more meat on the bone: "A software engine is defined as a core component of a software application that powers its functionality by pre-packaging complex systems into a reusable component that often works in a plug-and-play model to streamline software development."

Effectively, think about the "make" or "buy" decision when you think software engine.  Do you want to write the code necessary to meet the needs of a system or do you want to buy a piece of existing software that meets the needs?  

An example is a relational database engine.  No body really builds their own data storage mechanisms any more; they buy existing software like Microsoft SQL Server or Oracle or use something like PostgreSQL.

Software engines have a basket of "pros" and "cons"; as does writing your own code or even building your own software engine.

An XBRL processor is a software engine that specializes in working with "stuff" that exists in the XBRL format.  But, an XBRL processor only focuses on XBRL.

Something like a standard XBRL-based digital financial report processor would specialize in more than just the XBRL aspect of a financial report.  It also deals with the complexities of a financial report within the engine.

And so a software engine deals with a "package" of fundamental, common, complex critical tasks in the form of a reusable component or manageable unit of software.  A software engine is effectively a problem solving system and the more that system does, the less software developers need to do.  All the necessary pieces need to be included in a software engine.  The advantages of a software engine include:

  • Modularity and Reusability: Software engines encapsulate very specific functionality, making it easier to reuse them across different software projects. Developers can integrate engines into multiple applications without reinventing the wheel.
  • Efficiency: Software engines optimize performance by handling complex tasks efficiently. Because software engines are used on many different projects they are fine-tuned for specific purposes, resulting in better resource utilization and efficiency.
  • Consistency: When using software engines, developers adhere to consistent patterns and practices. This consistency enhances code quality and maintainability.  Also, when a software engine is a standards-based software engine; there is even more consistency.
  • Specialization: Software engines can focus on specific domains or areas of interest. This specialization allows them to excel in their designated areas. They do only that one set of tasks, but they do those tasks very well.
  • Metadata handling: Many software engines incorporate metadata, which defines how real data is processed. This metadata-driven approach enables flexibility and adaptability.
  • Tuning capabilities: Unlike one-off software modules, software engines can be tuned for optimal performance without extensive rewriting.

Open source software engines offer even more advantages.  Each software developer writing their own code for doing common tasks, effectively reinventing the wheel, is a poor use of resources.  Consider software engines where it makes sense.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS)

Image
Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS) is an interesting idea that combines the relational paradigm and the knowledge graph paradigm.  This documentation, Why RKGS , explains the idea. This gets even more interesting with the notion of "relational AI".  RelationalAI is described as follows by the company of the same name, Relational.ai : “RelationalAI is a cloud-based relational knowledge graph management system, with state of the art probabilistic processing and declarative reasoning at scale to make developing Data Applications a superpower for your business.” This notion of knowledge graphs represented in relational databases fits into my belief that knowledge graphs have two aspects: the expression SYNTAX and the logic of what is expressed or SEMANTICS. While the LOGIC of a knowledge graph is always the same regardless of technical syntax used to express that logic; there are many, many different technical syntaxes that can be used to represent a knowledge graph. There
Read more

Getting Started with Auditchain Luca

Image
(Note that a newer, production version as opposed to only the development version , of Luca Suite is available) The Innovator's Dilemma points out that disruptive innovations often look like toys that are doing everything wrong. Auditchain Luca , which is part of the Auditchain Suite , is a unique approach to creating a knowledge graph .  To experience using Auditchain Luca, have a look at the Getting Started with Auditchain Luca instructions. Be sure to grab the Excel and JSON import files used for this getting started exercise.   This getting started exercise uses one of several different approaches to getting information into a tool for constructing and viewing professional quality knowledge graphs .  Additional getting started guides will be made available over time. Auditchain Luca might not make sense to you if you don't understand the paradigm shift that is occurring and if you have not shifted your mental map. For the next step in your journey, consider trying creat
Read more

Evaluating the Quality of XBRL-based Financial Reports

Image
From the time public companies started submitting XBRL-based financial reports to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, I have been looking at those reports, trying to understand the XBRL-based reports, and trying to figure out how to get them right.  That information was used to figure out how to create software applications that help professional accountants get these reports right. Here is information that summarizes my testing and results which I stopped doing March 31, 2019: Analysis of the high level accounting relationships in the 10-Ks of about 5,716 financial reports  (5,063 public companies, about 89.1% got all these high level accounting relationships consistent with expectation, 623 were inconsistent and manual confirmation revealed the inconsistency was an error) Documentation that helps you understand 26 different types of errors in XBRL-based reports High quality documentation of hundreds of errors in XBRL-based reports submitted by public companies to the SEC Doc
Read more