TRANSITION TO MODULAR ARCHITECTURE IN MOBILE FINANCE APPLICATIONS

Year 2024, Volume: 20 Issue: 1, 10 - 13, 31.12.2024

Pınar Celdirme Kaygusuz

Abstract

Purpose- As user expectations and market demands continue to evolve, the mobile Finance applications undergoes constant updates to ensure it remains both responsive to user needs and capable of delivering reliable and high-quality services. However, as applications grow in complexity, maintaining their scalability, flexibility, and manageability becomes increasingly challenging. In this context, adopting a modular software architecture emerges as a strategic solution, offering a more streamlined approach to reducing the intricacy of mobile applications while enhancing their adaptability and scalability. This paper’s objective is to show clear comparison between moduler structure and monolitic application design. After discussing the benefits of moduler structure, a guideline will be given in order to transition moduler architecture.
Mehodology- The current structure is analyzed in dependencies aspect. The modules and how to eliminate dependencies while forming modules which can simplify development processes, improve application performance, and make updates more efficient. Furthermore, the study highlights the key advantages of this architectural shift, such as easier maintenance, faster feature deployment, and improved testing capabilities.
Findings-Specific criterias are outlined to guide the identification and definition of modules, ensuring that the modular design aligns with the application's objectives and delivers optimal benefits.
Conclusion- The study shows the positive contribution of modularization in Finance applications to support the fast changing demands.

Keywords

Modular structure, refactoring, dependency injection, modularization, mobile finance application

References

• Al-Barakati, A. (2021). Leveraging Artificial Intelligence–enabled workflow framework for legacy transformation. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(12), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0121239
• Amirat, A. (2012). Generic model for software architecture evolution. In 2012 International Conference on Advanced Computer Science Applications and Technologies (ACSAT) (pp. 139–143). Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACSAT.2012.79
• Askhøj, C., Christensen, C. K. F., & Mortensen, N. H. (2021). Cross domain modularization tool: Mechanics, electronics, and software. Concurrent Engineering, 29(3), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063293X211000331
• Dörbecker, R., & Böhmann, T. (2013). The concept and effects of service modularity: A literature review. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 1357–1366). https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2013.22
• Ghasemi, M., Sharafi, S. M., & Arman, A. (2015). Towards an analytical approach to measure modularity in software architecture design. Journal of Software, 10(4), 465–479.
• Hasselbring, W., Wojcieszak, M., & Dustdar, S. (2021). Control flow versus data flow in distributed systems integration: Revival of flow-based programming for the industrial internet of things. IEEE Internet Computing, 25(4), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2021.3053712
• Nooraei, M., & Mirzaie, M. (2023). An empirical analysis for software robustness vulnerability in terms of modularity quality. Systems Engineering, 26. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21686
• Zheng, H., Kramer, J., & Chang, S. (2020). Auto-modularity enforcement framework using micro-service architecture. Journal of Visual Languages and Sentient Systems, 2020, 17–22.