/** \page engine Engine Framework

API: \ref Engine

Additional engine API documentation can be found in the src/doc/design/engine.texinfo file.

This file contains some extra meta-information that is not directly relevant
to the API documentation.

\section firstclass First Class Objects (C structs) vs. Storing Data in KVP Trees

API: \ref KVP

Suppose you have a neat idea for a new feature for the GnuCash engine.
Should you create a C structure (a "first class object") and all
of the required machinery for it (e.g. an SQL backend), or should you
just put all of the data in a suitable KVP (Key Value Pair) frame
somewhere? 

The answer depends on whether the concept requires extensive
pointer chasing between different types of existing C structs,
or whether it more naturally can hang with some existing object.

If it seems to be an independent concept, it can still be placed
in the KVP tree of the book, which gives it a 'top-level' existance.

If the concept is used only infrequently, then it probably belongs 
in a KVP tree.  If the concept has performance-critical requriements,
then it is better to implement it as a C struct, and similarly
design an appropriate SQL table around it, so that the database
can be queried efficiently and rapidly.

\subsection terms Terminology:

- First-class object:  something that has a C struct associated with it,
and has its own specialized backend infrastructure for storing/quering
it.

- Second-class object: something that lives entirely in a KVP tree.
Note, however, that not all data in a KVP tree deserves to be called
an 'object'.  Some things in a KVP tree are merely 'attributes'.
If you push on this point, there is indeed a gray area between
second-class objects and attributes. 

*/
