For a menu with AFRM-Z acrostic, the letter 'M' may visit the submenu with the MIDYAT acrostic.
The word MIDYAT is derivable from David (a.s.)
The metaphor may reflect him -- able craftsman, warrior, king, and prophet. The order of listing, within the submenu is mostly the time-order, w.r.t. the life of David (a.s.), as well as, in program-development phases.
Existing Macros (Include'd and/or Developed), organized in a variety of ways, that the programmer(s) can locate and use. Here we start.
w.r.t. taking orders (e.g: abstaining from drinking from the river) that was brought to his commander by the angels (descending from Musa (a.s.) and Harun).
This is the transition item between the previous two the individual sometimes command-getting) items and the latter (kingdom) phase. He is developing (and here you grow the macros first declared/placed in the Macro-scape item.
This means "over there". For a king, it may refer to both foreign relations and to subjects who are not right-around. i.e: When some intermediate mechanisms/personennell is needed for interaction. Here, you handle remote-connections, and (except, hard disk?) also non-resident) file-system activities.
This is where your subjects come together and the interaction is prescribed. The contract(s) - whether involving only a few individuals, or encompassing the whole society/system. i.e: The concurrency, co-operation, resource allocation related mechanisms, fit here. Without attending this, your nation (or, software, for that matter) could be running rather carelessly. If overdone, it may lead to excessive-glue-protocol (EGP) syndrome. Here, you should decide for the optimal contracts/behavior/protocols, and may find the tools that I provide under this submenu valuable.
Barbers shave hair. Kings manage. They need not share each other's tricks-of-trade. It suffices, when each do their job right. In fact, telling everything is, at times, exactly a disservice to the service-receiver. The service-receiver just needs to verify whether his/her own concerns (or, wish list criteria) are met; Not how.
For example, if you tell out every security feature that exists anywhere, in your land, that could only benefit the foreign (military) agents, and burglars, etc. The people may need your not telling, for example, the patrol schedules, your secret weapons, and war strategies. Hence, you translate (re-code, encipher/decipher) your acts/steps/behavior, in a way that keeps functionality, and even possibly improves it.
The main goals are optimization and/or obfuscation of functionality, and/or a balancing of the needs/expectations of the internal-vs-external entities. Relates to the resulting/executable code, mostly. e.g.: Not a direct one-to-one mapping of the source to executable but some transformation, while preserving the functioning - thereby, possibly making it more difficult to decompile for a reconstruction of the source.