BazaIT - All-in-one hiring platform for Tech companies in Europe. We are simplifying tech hiring and saving time up to 4 times and costs.
Our mission is Good teams - awesome IT products - changed world for better.

BazaIT

bazait

The wait is over! - it’s time to celebrate the champion startups of the world. Shout out to all of the participants in our ! You did a wonderful job showcasing your incredible startups and powering through another year. 2023 Startups of the Year is a community-driven voting platform brought to you by HackerNoon that recognizes and celebrates tech startups changing technology and the world for the better. The award started on May 8th, 2023, where the internet nominated and voted for 30k startups around the world. The voting period remained open until December 31, 2023, and now we are here with the winner announcement after a comprehensive evaluation by the HackerNoon team. Startups of the Year 2023 To see the top 3 startups in each respective city, visit and pick a city. hackernoon.com/startups You’ll get a little surprise 😉 Here are the Startups of the Year Regional Announcements: North America Europe Asia Africa South America Oceania Misc/Remote From all of us at HackerNoon, thank YOU for your excellent campaign perseverance 🥺 This year has been awesome! Startups of the Year 2023 is concluded with 623k+ total votes, up from 215k+ votes in the inaugural startup competition. We look forward to seeing you again in the next campaign (stay tuned 😉)! Without further ado, let us kick off the announcement by celebrating the cities with top votes per region for 2023 🎉 North America (11,697 votes): Winner: Bloomfilter Cleveland, Ohio (8,835 votes) - Winner: SerpApi Austin, Texas , California (5,564 votes) - Winner: Finch San Francisco (4,258 votes) - Winner: RELAYTO SoMa, California - (3339 votes) Winner: Windscribe Toronto, Canada, North America (3304 votes) - Winner: Vouched Seattle (2716 votes) - Winner: Seccuri Palo Alto, CA, North America (2671 votes) - Winner: Salsa Valley Miami, FL, North America (2,613 votes) - Winner: Majhi Group Manhattan, New York (2423 votes) - Winner: Flieber, Inc. New York City, NY, North America See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, North America, here Europe (45,612 votes) - Winner: Algomo London, UK (2,344votes) - Winner: Data Lake Warsaw, Poland (1,955 votes) - Winner: Hoken Tech Bari, Italy (1716 votes) - Winner: Not8 Amsterdam, Netherlands (1657 votes) - Winner: KYVE Frankfurt Am Main, Germany (1566 votes) - Winner: BazaIT Kyiv, Ukraine (1496 votes) - Winner:  Unity Network Tallinn, Estonia (1,478 votes) - Winner: Volcaino Ghent, Belgium (1,288 votes) - Winner: Owl Me Dublin, Ireland (1198 votes) - Winner: Groover Paris, France See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, Europe, here Oceania (3,350 votes) - Winner: Sharepass Melbourne (2,107 votes) - Winner: The Catfisher Project Perth, Australia (220 votes) - Winner: Gemini AI Solutions Auckland, New Zealand, Oceania (213 votes) - Winner: Nexustorage Wellington, New Zealand, Oceania (138 votes) - Winner: Coviu Sydney (124 votes) - Winner: Bopple Brisbane, Australia, Oceania (124 votes) - Winner: Regional CFO New South Wales, Australia, Oceania (106 votes) - Winner: Edit on the Spot Gold Coast, Australia, Oceania (93 votes) - Winner: Knowledge Satnav Canbera, Australia, Oceania , Australia, Oceania (48 votes) - Winner: Peptalk360 North Melbourne, Melbourne See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, Oceania, here Asia (16,345 votes) - Winner: Serenity Shield Singapore (13,588 votes) - Winners: QUIXY Telangana, India (10,168 votes) - Winner: HealthySure Mumbai, India (3,865 votes) - Winner: InterviewBuddy Visakhapatnam, India (3,733 votes) - Winner: Omniflo Bengaluru, India (4589 votes) - Winner: MeNow Tel Aviv (3877 votes) - Winner: ForestVPN Dubai (2478 votes) - Winner: TechGraph Powai, Mumbai, India (1004 votes) - Winner: Reelo Ahmedabad, GJ, India (875 votes) - Winner: Debt Hunter Hong Kong, China See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, Asia, here Africa (8,179 votes) - Winner: GO PLATFORM Algiers, Algeria (767 votes) - Winner: Tudu Accra, Ghana (415 votes) - Winner: Treford Lagos, Nigeria (265 votes) - Winner: Phalconwise Ogbomosho, Nigeria (157 votes) - Winner: AbuErdan Cairo (151 votes) - Winner: Eazipay Lekki (144 votes) - Winner: KaziConnect Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (101 votes) - Winner: faceATT Gauteng, South Africa (79 votes) - Winner: Dimagi Cape Town (71 votes) - Winner: Sabi Addis Ababa See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, Africa, here South America (376 votes ) - Winner: UpGirl Santiago, Chile (217 votes) - Winner: Klever Sao Paulo, Brazil (191 votes) - Winner: Tributo Simple Buenos Aires, Argentina (127 votes) - Winner: Light-it Montevideo, Uruguay (87 votes) -Winner: Thousand Antioquia, Colombia (108 votes) - Winner: GetLavado Lima (101 votes) - Winner: Cogniflow Medellin (73 votes) - Winner: TPAGA Bogota (73 votes) - Winner: Reliv Quito (47 votes) - WInner: Quantex Cordoba See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, South America, here Misc/Remote: Featured Startups (1500 votes) - Winner: CIC Chain Remote, Earth (1193 votes) - Winner: Reship Colony US Misc (146 Votes) - Winner: Partful UK, Misc (116 votes) - Winner: GoMining British Virgin Islands Misc (283 Votes) - Winner: tomorrowSpace Germany Misc (225 votes) - Winner: Dtravel Cayman Islands See the complete announcement for Misc/Remote startups . here Once again, HUGE CONGRATULATIONS and BIG PROPS to all of the top Startups of each region this year! The whole team at HackerNoon would like to thank you for your perseverance in the campaign, and we look forward to seeing you in the next campaign. About HackerNoon’s Startups Of The Year Startups of The Year is HackerNoon’s Flagship community-driven event celebrating startups that survived and thrived in 2023. 30,000 startups across 4200+ cities and six continents participated this year to be crowned the best startup in their city. Visit our page to learn more. FAQ Companies that blog more get 67% more leads - Jumpstart your company’s blogging journey by purchasing our . Business Blogging Package The 2023 Startups Of The Year is sponsored by: . . The winners get a free .Tech Domain, a HackerNoon NFT, and a Tech Company News Page. TECH Domains

Stand Up for the Champion Startups of the Year! 

বছরের চ্যাম্পিয়ন স্টার্টআপের জন্য দাঁড়ান!

Setzen Sie sich für die Champion-Startups des Jahres ein!

¡Defiende a las startups campeonas del año!

Défendez les startups championnes de l’année !

वर्ष के चैंपियन स्टार्टअप के लिए खड़े रहें!

今年のチャンピオンスタートアップのために立ち上がろう!

올해의 챔피언 스타트업을 위해 일어서세요!

Defenda as startups campeãs do ano!

Встаньте на защиту стартапов-чемпионов года!

Yılın Şampiyon Startup'ları için Ayağa Kalkın!

Hãy ủng hộ các công ty khởi nghiệp vô địch của năm!

为年度冠军初创企业挺身而出！

On War by Carl Von Clausewitz, is part of the HackerNoon Books Series. You can jump to any chapter in this book here . Decision of the Combat Book IV: Chapter VII. Decision of the Combat No battle is decided in a single moment, although in every battle there arise moments of crisis, on which the result depends. The loss of a battle is, therefore, a gradual falling of the scale. But there is in every combat a point of time (*) (*) Under the then existing conditions of armament understood. This point is of supreme importance, as practically the whole conduct of a great battle depends on a correct solution of this question—viz., How long can a given command prolong its resistance? If this is incorrectly answered in practice—the whole manœuvre depending on it may collapse—e.g., Kouroupatkin at Liao-Yang, September 1904. when it may be regarded as decided, in such a way that the renewal of the fight would be a new battle, not a continuation of the old one. To have a clear notion on this point of time, is very important, in order to be able to decide whether, with the prompt assistance of reinforcements, the combat can again be resumed with advantage. Often in combats which are beyond restoration new forces are sacrificed in vain; often through neglect the decision has not been seized when it might easily have been secured. Here are two examples, which could not be more to the point: When the Prince of Hohenlohe, in 1806, at Jena,(*) with 35,000 men opposed to from 60,000 to 70,000, under Buonaparte, had accepted battle, and lost it—but lost it in such a way that the 35,000 might be regarded as dissolved—General Rüchel undertook to renew the fight with about 12,000; the consequence was that in a moment his force was scattered in like manner. (*) October 14, 1806. On the other hand, on the same day at Auerstadt, the Prussians maintained a combat with 25,000, against Davoust, who had 28,000, until mid-day, without success, it is true, but still without the force being reduced to a state of dissolution without even greater loss than the enemy, who was very deficient in cavalry;—but they neglected to use the reserve of 18,000, under General Kalkreuth, to restore the battle which, under these circumstances, it would have been impossible to lose. Each combat is a whole in which the partial combats combine themselves into one total result. In this total result lies the decision of the combat. This success need not be exactly a victory such as we have denoted in the sixth chapter, for often the preparations for that have not been made, often there is no opportunity if the enemy gives way too soon, and in most cases the decision, even when the resistance has been obstinate, takes place before such a degree of success is attained as would completely satisfy the idea of a victory. We therefore ask, Which is commonly the moment of the decision, that is to say, that moment when a fresh, effective, of course not disproportionate, force, can no longer turn a disadvantageous battle? If we pass over false attacks, which in accordance with their nature are properly without decision, then, 1. If the possession of a movable object was the object of the combat, the loss of the same is always the decision. 2. If the possession of ground was the object of the combat, then the decision generally lies in its loss. Still not always, only if this ground is of peculiar strength, ground which is easy to pass over, however important it may be in other respects, can be re-taken without much danger. 3. But in all other cases, when these two circumstances have not already decided the combat, therefore, particularly in case the destruction of the enemy’s force is the principal object, the decision is reached at that moment when the conqueror ceases to feel himself in a state of disintegration, that is, of unserviceableness to a certain extent, when therefore, there is no further advantage in using the successive efforts spoken of in the twelfth chapter of the third book. On this ground we have given the strategic unity of the battle its place here. A battle, therefore, in which the assailant has not lost his condition of order and perfect efficiency at all, or, at least, only in a small part of his force, whilst the opposing forces are, more or less, disorganised throughout, is also not to be retrieved; and just as little if the enemy has recovered his efficiency. The smaller, therefore, that part of a force is which has really been engaged, the greater that portion which as reserve has contributed to the result only by its presence. So much the less will any new force of the enemy wrest again the victory from our hands, and that Commander who carries out to the furthest with his Army the principle of conducting the combat with the greatest economy of forces, and making the most of the moral effect of strong reserves, goes the surest way to victory. We must allow that the French, in modern times, especially when led by Buonaparte, have shown a thorough mastery in this. Further, the moment when the crisis-stage of the combat ceases with the conqueror, and his original state of order is restored, takes place sooner the smaller the unit he controls. A picket of cavalry pursuing an enemy at full gallop will in a few minutes resume its proper order, and the crisis ceases. A whole regiment of cavalry requires a longer time. It lasts still longer with infantry, if extended in single lines of skirmishers, and longer again with Divisions of all arms, when it happens by chance that one part has taken one direction and another part another direction, and the combat has therefore caused a loss of the order of formation, which usually becomes still worse from no part knowing exactly where the other is. Thus, therefore, the point of time when the conqueror has collected the instruments he has been using, and which are mixed up and partly out of order, the moment when he has in some measure rearranged them and put them in their proper places, and thus brought the battle-workshop into a little order, this moment, we say, is always later, the greater the total force. Again, this moment comes later if night overtakes the conqueror in the crisis, and, lastly, it comes later still if the country is broken and thickly wooded. But with regard to these two points, we must observe that night is also a great means of protection, and it is only seldom that circumstances favour the expectation of a successful result from a night attack, as on March 10, 1814, at Laon,(*) where York against Marmont gives us an example completely in place here. In the same way a wooded and broken country will afford protection against a reaction to those who are engaged in the long crisis of victory. Both, therefore, the night as well as the wooded and broken country are obstacles which make the renewal of the same battle more difficult instead of facilitating it. (*) The celebrated charge at night upon Marmont’s Corps. Hitherto, we have considered assistance arriving for the losing side as a mere increase of force, therefore, as a reinforcement coming up directly from the rear, which is the most usual case. But the case is quite different if these fresh forces come upon the enemy in flank or rear. On the effect of flank or rear attacks so far as they belong to Strategy, we shall speak in another place: such a one as we have here in view, intended for the restoration of the combat, belongs chiefly to tactics, and is only mentioned because we are here speaking of tactical results, our ideas, therefore, must trench upon the province of tactics. By directing a force against the enemy’s flank and rear its efficacy may be much intensified; but this is so far from being a necessary result always that the efficacy may, on the other hand, be just as much weakened. The circumstances under which the combat has taken place decide upon this part of the plan as well as upon every other, without our being able to enter thereupon here. But, at the same time, there are in it two things of importance for our subject: first, flank and rear attacks have, as a rule, a more favourable effect on the consequences of the decision than upon the decision itself. Now as concerns the retrieving a battle, the first thing to be arrived at above all is a favourable decision and not magnitude of success. In this view one would therefore think that a force which comes to re-establish our combat is of less assistance if it falls upon the enemy in flank and rear, therefore separated from us, than if it joins itself to us directly; certainly, cases are not wanting where it is so, but we must say that the majority are on the other side, and they are so on account of the second point which is here important to us. This second point is the moral effect of the surprise, which, as a rule, a reinforcement coming up to re-establish a combat has generally in its favour. Now the effect of a surprise is always heightened if it takes place in the flank or rear, and an enemy completely engaged in the crisis of victory in his extended and scattered order, is less in a state to counteract it. Who does not feel that an attack in flank or rear, which at the commencement of the battle, when the forces are concentrated and prepared for such an event would be of little importance, gains quite another weight in the last moment of the combat. We must, therefore, at once admit that in most cases a reinforcement coming up on the flank or rear of the enemy will be more efficacious, will be like the same weight at the end of a longer lever, and therefore that under these circumstances, we may undertake to restore the battle with the same force which employed in a direct attack would be quite insufficient. Here results almost defy calculation, because the moral forces gain completely the ascendency. This is therefore the right field for boldness and daring. The eye must, therefore, be directed on all these objects, all these moments of co-operating forces must be taken into consideration, when we have to decide in doubtful cases whether or not it is still possible to restore a combat which has taken an unfavourable turn. If the combat is to be regarded as not yet ended, then the new contest which is opened by the arrival of assistance fuses into the former; therefore they flow together into one common result, and the first disadvantage vanishes completely out of the calculation. But this is not the case if the combat was already decided; then there are two results separate from each other. Now if the assistance which arrives is only of a relative strength, that is, if it is not in itself alone a match for the enemy, then a favourable result is hardly to be expected from this second combat: but if it is so strong that it can undertake the second combat without regard to the first, then it may be able by a favourable issue to compensate or even overbalance the first combat, but never to make it disappear altogether from the account. At the battle of Kunersdorf,(*) Frederick the Great at the first onset carried the left of the Russian position, and took seventy pieces of artillery; at the end of the battle both were lost again, and the whole result of the first combat was wiped out of the account. Had it been possible to stop at the first success, and to put off the second part of the battle to the coming day, then, even if the King had lost it, the advantages of the first would always have been a set off to the second. (*) August 12, 1759. But when a battle proceeding disadvantageously is arrested and turned before its conclusion, its minus result on our side not only disappears from the account, but also becomes the foundation of a greater victory. If, for instance, we picture to ourselves exactly the tactical course of the battle, we may easily see that until it is finally concluded all successes in partial combats are only decisions in suspense, which by the capital decision may not only be destroyed, but changed into the opposite. The more our forces have suffered, the more the enemy will have expended on his side; the greater, therefore, will be the crisis for the enemy, and the more the superiority of our fresh troops will tell. If now the total result turns in our favour, if we wrest from the enemy the field of battle and recover all the trophies again, then all the forces which he has sacrificed in obtaining them become sheer gain for us, and our former defeat becomes a stepping-stone to a greater triumph. The most brilliant feats which with victory the enemy would have so highly prized that the loss of forces which they cost would have been disregarded, leave nothing now behind but regret at the sacrifice entailed. Such is the alteration which the magic of victory and the curse of defeat produces in the specific weight of the same elements. Therefore, even if we are decidedly superior in strength, and are able to repay the enemy his victory by a greater still, it is always better to forestall the conclusion of a disadvantageous combat, if it is of proportionate importance, so as to turn its course rather than to deliver a second battle. Field-Marshal Daun attempted in the year 1760 to come to the assistance of General Laudon at Leignitz, whilst the battle lasted; but when he failed, he did not attack the King next day, although he did not want for means to do so. For these reasons serious combats of advance guards which precede a battle are to be looked upon only as necessary evils, and when not necessary they are to be avoided.(*) (*) This, however, was not Napoleon’s view. A vigorous attack of his advance guard he held to be necessary always, to fix the enemy’s attention and “paralyse his independent will-power.” It was the failure to make this point which, in August 1870, led von Moltke repeatedly into the very jaws of defeat, from which only the lethargy of Bazaine on the one hand and the initiative of his subordinates, notably of von Alvensleben, rescued him. This is the essence of the new Strategic Doctrine of the French General Staff. See the works of Bonnal, Foch, &C.—EDITOR We have still another conclusion to examine. If on a regular pitched battle, the decision has gone against one, this does not constitute a motive for determining on a new one. The determination for this new one must proceed from other relations. This conclusion, however, is opposed by a moral force, which we must take into account: it is the feeling of rage and revenge. From the oldest Field-Marshal to the youngest drummer-boy this feeling is general, and, therefore, troops are never in better spirits for fighting than when they have to wipe out a stain. This is, however, only on the supposition that the beaten portion is not too great in proportion to the whole, because otherwise the above feeling is lost in that of powerlessness. There is therefore a very natural tendency to use this moral force to repair the disaster on the spot, and on that account chiefly to seek another battle if other circumstances permit. It then lies in the nature of the case that this second battle must be an offensive one. In the catalogue of battles of second-rate importance there are many examples to be found of such retaliatory battles; but great battles have generally too many other determining causes to be brought on by this weaker motive. Such a feeling must undoubtedly have led the noble Blücher with his third Corps to the field of battle on February 14, 1814, when the other two had been beaten three days before at Montmirail. Had he known that he would have come upon Buonaparte in person, then, naturally, preponderating reasons would have determined him to put off his revenge to another day: but he hoped to revenge himself on Marmont, and instead of gaining the reward of his desire for honourable satisfaction, he suffered the penalty of his erroneous calculation. On the duration of the combat and the moment of its decision depend the distances from each other at which those masses should be placed which are intended to fight in conjunction with each other. This disposition would be a tactical arrangement in so far as it relates to one and the same battle; it can, however, only be regarded as such, provided the position of the troops is so compact that two separate combats cannot be imagined, and consequently that the space which the whole occupies can be regarded strategically as a mere point. But in War, cases frequently occur where even those forces intended to fight in unison must be so far separated from each other that while their union for one common combat certainly remains the principal object, still the occurrence of separate combats remains possible. Such a disposition is therefore strategic. Dispositions of this kind are: marches in separate masses and columns, the formation of advance guards, and flanking columns, also the grouping of reserves intended to serve as supports for more than one strategic point; the concentration of several Corps from widely extended cantonments, &c. &c. We can see that the necessity for these arrangements may constantly arise, and may consider them something like the small change in the strategic economy, whilst the capital battles, and all that rank with them are the gold and silver pieces. About HackerNoon Book Series: We bring you the most important technical, scientific, and insightful public domain books. This book is part of the public domain. Carl von Clausewitz (2006). On War. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. Retrieved https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1946/pg1946-images.html This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org , located at https://www.gutenberg.org/policy/license.html .

Decision of the Combat

On War by Carl Von Clausewitz, is part of the HackerNoon Books Series. You can jump to any chapter in this book here . Boldness Book III: Chapter VI. Boldness The place and part which boldness takes in the dynamic system of powers, where it stands opposed to Foresight and prudence, has been stated in the chapter on the certainty of the result in order thereby to show, that theory has no right to restrict it by virtue of its legislative power. But this noble impulse, with which the human soul raises itself above the most formidable dangers, is to be regarded as an active principle peculiarly belonging to War. In fact, in what branch of human activity should boldness have a right of citizenship if not in War? From the transport-driver and the drummer up to the General, it is the noblest of virtues, the true steel which gives the weapon its edge and brilliancy. Let us admit in fact it has in War even its own prerogatives. Over and above the result of the calculation of space, time, and quantity, we must allow a certain percentage which boldness derives from the weakness of others, whenever it gains the mastery. It is therefore, virtually, a creative power. This is not difficult to demonstrate philosophically. As often as boldness encounters hesitation, the probability of the result is of necessity in its favour, because the very state of hesitation implies a loss of equilibrium already. It is only when it encounters cautious foresight—which we may say is just as bold, at all events just as strong and powerful as itself—that it is at a disadvantage; such cases, however, rarely occur. Out of the whole multitude of prudent men in the world, the great majority are so from timidity. Amongst large masses, boldness is a force, the special cultivation of which can never be to the detriment of other forces, because the great mass is bound to a higher will by the frame-work and joints of the order of battle and of the service, and therefore is guided by an intelligent power which is extraneous. Boldness is therefore here only like a spring held down until its action is required. The higher the rank the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind, that it may not be a mere blind outburst of passion to no purpose; for with increase of rank it becomes always less a matter of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole. Where regulations of the service, as a kind of second nature, prescribe for the masses, reflection must be the guide of the General, and in his case individual boldness in action may easily become a fault. Still, at the same time, it is a fine failing, and must not be looked at in the same light as any other. Happy the Army in which an untimely boldness frequently manifests itself; it is an exuberant growth which shows a rich soil. Even foolhardiness, that is boldness without an object, is not to be despised; in point of fact it is the same energy of feeling, only exercised as a kind of passion without any co-operation of the intelligent faculties. It is only when it strikes at the root of obedience, when it treats with contempt the orders of superior authority, that it must be repressed as a dangerous evil, not on its own account but on account of the act of disobedience, for there is nothing in War which is of greater importance than obedience. The reader will readily agree with us that, supposing an equal degree of discernment to be forthcoming in a certain number of cases, a thousand times as many of them will end in disaster through over-anxiety as through boldness. One would suppose it natural that the interposition of a reasonable object should stimulate boldness, and therefore lessen its intrinsic merit, and yet the reverse is the case in reality. The intervention of lucid thought or the general supremacy of mind deprives the emotional forces of a great part of their power. On that account boldness becomes of rarer occurrence the higher we ascend the scale of rank, for whether the discernment and the understanding do or do not increase with these ranks still the Commanders, in their several stations as they rise, are pressed upon more and more severely by objective things, by relations and claims from without, so that they become the more perplexed the lower the degree of their individual intelligence. This so far as regards War is the chief foundation of the truth of the French proverb:— “Tel brille au second qui s’éclipse au premier.” Almost all the Generals who are represented in history as merely having attained to mediocrity, and as wanting in decision when in supreme command, are men celebrated in their antecedent career for their boldness and decision.(*) (*) Beaulieu, Benedek, Bazaine, Buller, Melas, Mack. &c. &c. In those motives to bold action which arise from the pressure of necessity we must make a distinction. Necessity has its degrees of intensity. If it lies near at hand, if the person acting is in the pursuit of his object driven into great dangers in order to escape others equally great, then we can only admire his resolution, which still has also its value. If a young man to show his skill in horsemanship leaps across a deep cleft, then he is bold; if he makes the same leap pursued by a troop of head-chopping Janissaries he is only resolute. But the farther off the necessity from the point of action, the greater the number of relations intervening which the mind has to traverse; in order to realise them, by so much the less does necessity take from boldness in action. If Frederick the Great, in the year 1756, saw that War was inevitable, and that he could only escape destruction by being beforehand with his enemies, it became necessary for him to commence the War himself, but at the same time it was certainly very bold: for few men in his position would have made up their minds to do so. Although Strategy is only the province of Generals-in-Chief or Commanders in the higher positions, still boldness in all the other branches of an Army is as little a matter of indifference to it as their other military virtues. With an Army belonging to a bold race, and in which the spirit of boldness has been always nourished, very different things may be undertaken than with one in which this virtue, is unknown; for that reason we have considered it in connection with an Army. But our subject is specially the boldness of the General, and yet we have not much to say about it after having described this military virtue in a general way to the best of our ability. The higher we rise in a position of command, the more of the mind, understanding, and penetration predominate in activity, the more therefore is boldness, which is a property of the feelings, kept in subjection, and for that reason we find it so rarely in the highest positions, but then, so much the more should it be admired. Boldness, directed by an overruling intelligence, is the stamp of the hero: this boldness does not consist in venturing directly against the nature of things, in a downright contempt of the laws of probability, but, if a choice is once made, in the rigorous adherence to that higher calculation which genius, the tact of judgment, has gone over with the speed of lightning. The more boldness lends wings to the mind and the discernment, so much the farther they will reach in their flight, so much the more comprehensive will be the view, the more exact the result, but certainly always only in the sense that with greater objects greater dangers are connected. The ordinary man, not to speak of the weak and irresolute, arrives at an exact result so far as such is possible without ocular demonstration, at most after diligent reflection in his chamber, at a distance from danger and responsibility. Let danger and responsibility draw close round him in every direction, then he loses the power of comprehensive vision, and if he retains this in any measure by the influence of others, still he will lose his power of decision, because in that point no one can help him. We think then that it is impossible to imagine a distinguished General without boldness, that is to say, that no man can become one who is not born with this power of the soul, and we therefore look upon it as the first requisite for such a career. How much of this inborn power, developed and moderated through education and the circumstances of life, is left when the man has attained a high position, is the second question. The greater this power still is, the stronger will genius be on the wing, the higher will be its flight. The risks become always greater, but the purpose grows with them. Whether its lines proceed out of and get their direction from a distant necessity, or whether they converge to the keystone of a building which ambition has planned, whether Frederick or Alexander acts, is much the same as regards the critical view. If the one excites the imagination more because it is bolder, the other pleases the understanding most, because it has in it more absolute necessity. We have still to advert to one very important circumstance. The spirit of boldness can exist in an Army, either because it is in the people, or because it has been generated in a successful War conducted by able Generals. In the latter case it must of course be dispensed with at the commencement. Now in our days there is hardly any other means of educating the spirit of a people in this respect, except by War, and that too under bold Generals. By it alone can that effeminacy of feeling be counteracted, that propensity to seek for the enjoyment of comfort, which cause degeneracy in a people rising in prosperity and immersed in an extremely busy commerce. A Nation can hope to have a strong position in the political world only if its character and practice in actual War mutually support each other in constant reciprocal action. About HackerNoon Book Series: We bring you the most important technical, scientific, and insightful public domain books. This book is part of the public domain. Carl von Clausewitz (2006). On War. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. Retrieved https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1946/pg1946-images.html This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org , located at https://www.gutenberg.org/policy/license.html .

Boldness takes in the dynamic system of powers

The New Machiavelli by H. G. Wells, is part of the HackerNoon Books Series. You can jump to any chapter in this book here . MARGARET IN VENICE MARGARET IN VENICE 1 There comes into my mind a confused memory of conversations with Margaret; we must have had dozens altogether, and they mix in now for the most part inextricably not only with one another, but with later talks and with things we discussed at Pangbourne. We had the immensest anticipations of the years and opportunities that lay before us. I was now very deeply in love with her indeed. I felt not that I had cleaned up my life but that she had. We called each other “confederate” I remember, and made during our brief engagement a series of visits to the various legislative bodies in London, the County Council, the House of Commons, where we dined with Villiers, and the St. Pancras Vestry, where we heard Shaw speaking. I was full of plans and so was she of the way in which we were to live and work. We were to pay back in public service whatever excess of wealth beyond his merits old Seddon's economic advantage had won for him from the toiling people in the potteries. The end of the Boer War was so recent that that blessed word “efficiency” echoed still in people's minds and thoughts. Lord Roseberry in a memorable oration had put it into the heads of the big outer public, but the Baileys with a certain show of justice claimed to have set it going in the channels that took it to him—if as a matter of fact it was taken to him. But then it was their habit to make claims of that sort. They certainly did their share to keep “efficient” going. Altiora's highest praise was “thoroughly efficient.” We were to be a “thoroughly efficient” political couple of the “new type.” She explained us to herself and Oscar, she explained us to ourselves, she explained us to the people who came to her dinners and afternoons until the world was highly charged with explanation and expectation, and the proposal that I should be the Liberal candidate for the Kinghamstead Division seemed the most natural development in the world. I was full of the ideal of hard restrained living and relentless activity, and throughout a beautiful November at Venice, where chiefly we spent our honeymoon, we turned over and over again and discussed in every aspect our conception of a life tremendously focussed upon the ideal of social service. Most clearly there stands out a picture of ourselves talking in a gondola on our way to Torcella. Far away behind us the smoke of Murano forms a black stain upon an immense shining prospect of smooth water, water as unruffled and luminous as the sky above, a mirror on which rows of posts and distant black high-stemmed, swan-necked boats with their minutely clear swinging gondoliers, float aerially. Remote and low before us rises the little tower of our destination. Our men swing together and their oars swirl leisurely through the water, hump back in the rowlocks, splash sharply and go swishing back again. Margaret lies back on cushions, with her face shaded by a holland parasol, and I sit up beside her. “You see,” I say, and in spite of Margaret's note of perfect acquiescence I feel myself reasoning against an indefinable antagonism, “it is so easy to fall into a slack way with life. There may seem to be something priggish in a meticulous discipline, but otherwise it is so easy to slip into indolent habits—and to be distracted from one's purpose. The country, the world, wants men to serve its constructive needs, to work out and carry out plans. For a man who has to make a living the enemy is immediate necessity; for people like ourselves it's—it's the constant small opportunity of agreeable things.” “Frittering away,” she says, “time and strength.” “That is what I feel. It's so pleasant to pretend one is simply modest, it looks so foolish at times to take one's self too seriously. We've GOT to take ourselves seriously.” She endorses my words with her eyes. “I feel I can do great things with life.” “I KNOW you can.” “But that's only to be done by concentrating one's life upon one main end. We have to plan our days, to make everything subserve our scheme.” “I feel,” she answers softly, “we ought to give—every hour.” Her face becomes dreamy. “I WANT to give every hour,” she adds. 2 That holiday in Venice is set in my memory like a little artificial lake in uneven confused country, as something very bright and skylike, and discontinuous with all about it. The faded quality of the very sunshine of that season, the mellow discoloured palaces and places, the huge, time-ripened paintings of departed splendours, the whispering, nearly noiseless passage of hearse-black gondolas, for the horrible steam launch had not yet ruined Venice, the stilled magnificences of the depopulated lagoons, the universal autumn, made me feel altogether in recess from the teeming uproars of reality. There was not a dozen people all told, no Americans and scarcely any English, to dine in the big cavern of a dining-room, with its vistas of separate tables, its distempered walls and its swathed chandeliers. We went about seeing beautiful things, accepting beauty on every hand, and taking it for granted that all was well with ourselves and the world. It was ten days or a fortnight before I became fretful and anxious for action; a long tranquillity for such a temperament as mine. Our pleasures were curiously impersonal, a succession of shared aesthetic appreciation threads all that time. Our honeymoon was no exultant coming together, no mutual shout of “YOU!” We were almost shy with one another, and felt the relief of even a picture to help us out. It was entirely in my conception of things that I should be very watchful not to shock or distress Margaret or press the sensuous note. Our love-making had much of the tepid smoothness of the lagoons. We talked in delicate innuendo of what should be glorious freedoms. Margaret had missed Verona and Venice in her previous Italian journey—fear of the mosquito had driven her mother across Italy to the westward route—and now she could fill up her gaps and see the Titians and Paul Veroneses she already knew in colourless photographs, the Carpaccios, (the St. George series delighted her beyond measure,) the Basaitis and that great statue of Bartolomeo Colleoni that Ruskin praised. But since I am not a man to look at pictures and architectural effects day after day, I did watch Margaret very closely and store a thousand memories of her. I can see her now, her long body drooping a little forward, her sweet face upraised to some discovered familiar masterpiece and shining with a delicate enthusiasm. I can hear again the soft cadences of her voice murmuring commonplace comments, for she had no gift of expressing the shapeless satisfaction these things gave her. Margaret, I perceived, was a cultivated person, the first cultivated person with whom I had ever come into close contact. She was cultivated and moral, and I, I now realise, was never either of these things. She was passive, and I am active. She did not simply and naturally look for beauty but she had been incited to look for it at school, and took perhaps a keener interest in books and lectures and all the organisation of beautiful things than she did in beauty itself; she found much of her delight in being guided to it. Now a thing ceases to be beautiful to me when some finger points me out its merits. Beauty is the salt of life, but I take my beauty as a wild beast gets its salt, as a constituent of the meal.... And besides, there was that between us that should have seemed more beautiful than any picture.... So we went about Venice tracking down pictures and spiral staircases and such-like things, and my brains were busy all the time with such things as a comparison of Venice and its nearest modern equivalent, New York, with the elaboration of schemes of action when we returned to London, with the development of a theory of Margaret. Our marriage had done this much at least, that it had fused and destroyed those two independent ways of thinking about her that had gone on in my mind hitherto. Suddenly she had become very near to me, and a very big thing, a sort of comprehensive generalisation behind a thousand questions, like the sky or England. The judgments and understandings that had worked when she was, so to speak, miles away from my life, had now to be altogether revised. Trifling things began to matter enormously, that she had a weak and easily fatigued back, for example, or that when she knitted her brows and stammered a little in talking, it didn't really mean that an exquisite significance struggled for utterance. We visited pictures in the mornings chiefly. In the afternoon, unless we were making a day-long excursion in a gondola, Margaret would rest for an hour while I prowled about in search of English newspapers, and then we would go to tea in the Piazza San Marco and watch the drift of people feeding the pigeons and going into the little doors beneath the sunlit arches and domes of Saint Mark's. Then perhaps we would stroll on the Piazzetta, or go out into the sunset in a gondola. Margaret became very interested in the shops that abound under the colonnades and decided at last to make an extensive purchase of table glass. “These things,” she said, “are quite beautiful, and far cheaper than anything but the most ordinary looking English ware.” I was interested in her idea, and a good deal charmed by the delightful qualities of tinted shape, slender handle and twisted stem. I suggested we should get not simply tumblers and wineglasses but bedroom waterbottles, fruit- and sweet-dishes, water-jugs, and in the end we made quite a business-like afternoon of it. I was beginning now to long quite definitely for events. Energy was accumulating in me, and worrying me for an outlet. I found the TIMES and the DAILY TELEGRAPH and the other papers I managed to get hold of, more and more stimulating. I nearly wrote to the former paper one day in answer to a letter by Lord Grimthorpe—I forget now upon what point. I chafed secretly against this life of tranquil appreciations more and more. I found my attitudes of restrained and delicate affection for Margaret increasingly difficult to sustain. I surprised myself and her by little gusts of irritability, gusts like the catspaws before a gale. I was alarmed at these symptoms. One night when Margaret had gone up to her room, I put on a light overcoat, went out into the night and prowled for a long time through the narrow streets, smoking and thinking. I returned and went and sat on the edge of her bed to talk to her. “Look here, Margaret,” I said; “this is all very well, but I'm restless.” “Restless!” she said with a faint surprise in her voice. “Yes. I think I want exercise. I've got a sort of feeling—I've never had it before—as though I was getting fat.” “My dear!” she cried. “I want to do things;—ride horses, climb mountains, take the devil out of myself.” She watched me thoughtfully. “Couldn't we DO something?” she said. Do what? “I don't know. Couldn't we perhaps go away from here soon—and walk in the mountains—on our way home.” I thought. “There seems to be no exercise at all in this place.” “Isn't there some walk?” “I wonder,” I answered. “We might walk to Chioggia perhaps, along the Lido.” And we tried that, but the long stretch of beach fatigued Margaret's back, and gave her blisters, and we never got beyond Malamocco.... A day or so after we went out to those pleasant black-robed, bearded Armenians in their monastery at Saint Lazzaro, and returned towards sundown. We fell into silence. “PIU LENTO,” said Margaret to the gondolier, and released my accumulated resolution. “Let us go back to London,” I said abruptly. Margaret looked at me with surprised blue eyes. “This is beautiful beyond measure, you know,” I said, sticking to my point, “but I have work to do.” She was silent for some seconds. “I had forgotten,” she said. “So had I,” I sympathised, and took her hand. “Suddenly I have remembered.” She remained quite still. “There is so much to be done,” I said, almost apologetically. She looked long away from me across the lagoon and at last sighed, like one who has drunk deeply, and turned to me. “I suppose one ought not to be so happy,” she said. “Everything has been so beautiful and so simple and splendid. And clean. It has been just With You—the time of my life. It's a pity such things must end. But the world is calling you, dear.... I ought not to have forgotten it. I thought you were resting—and thinking. But if you are rested.—Would you like us to start to-morrow?” She looked at once so fragile and so devoted that on the spur of the moment I relented, and we stayed in Venice four more days. About HackerNoon Book Series: We bring you the most important technical, scientific, and insightful public domain books. This book is part of the public domain. H. G. Wells (2004). The New Machiavelli. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. Retrieved October 2022, from https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1047/1047-h/1047-h.htm This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org, located at https://www.gutenberg.org/policy/license.html.

MARGARET IN VENICE

How the journey for IOS Development become pretty simple and straight forward with Swift? When I started learning IOS development, I chose Objective-C as my core programming language. During my journey, I faced a lot of struggles with Objective-C because it is one of the toughest languages I had ever come across. It was a nightmare for me to develop apps with the help of Objective-C. The syntax of Objective-C is not very programmer friendly so it became very difficult for me to write and debug the code. Most of the beginners would also have the same problem with IOS development but when it comes to Android development things are very easy and it is like a cake walk because JAVA is much better than Objective-C to code. When I started my journey, Swift was already a booming thing in the market. Since Objective-C was an old programming language I thought that it had good resources and community to learn from. StackOverflow has a good community for Objective-C to deal with bugs and issues. For those reasons I chose Objective-C. Even though the resources and community are good, things were not happening in the way I wanted. So in the end, I got fed up with Objective-C and made a decision to change my core programming language to Swift because of some big reasons — As a Swift Programmer (Currently addicted to it 😍) I love to code in swift rather than Objective-C to build an IOS App from scratch. Because I found out that swift is more flexible than Objective-C. Swift was officially released in the year 2014 by Apple INC. Until 2014 IOS developers usually worked with Objective-C, an object-oriented superset of the C programming language that has been the core part for IOS development so far. But things are changed from 2014 because swift was introduced as a new programming language for IOS development that’s given IOS developers an alternative to choose Swift. Developers and programmers developed swift programming language with good syntactic sugar that employs modern programming language theory concepts and strives to present a simpler syntax. It is compatible with all of the existing IOS development tools like — XCode, Cocoa framework and many more. But it’s ease of use and improved features has helped swift to quickly replace Objective-C. This feature helps most of the beginners and developers to learn and develop new things quickly and easily. It’s designed to give developers more freedom than ever. In this article, we’ll explore a few reasons about why you should get started with the Swift programming language for your next iOS app development project if you haven’t already. You might already be an IOS developer with Objective-C background but we need to adopt the new changes quickly if they are good enough. The Quicker You Let Go Of Old Cheese, The Sooner You Can Enjoy New Cheese. — Dr. Spencer Johnson. The reasons for changing my core programming language to swift — Simplicity Photo by on rawpixel Unsplash Swift programming closely resembles natural English because of its good syntactic sugar. This readability makes it easier for existing programmers from JavaScript, Java, Python, R, and C++ to adopt Swift into their programming belt. Swift requires less code to perform the particular task but when it comes to Objective-C we need to write a verbose code to perform that same particular task. Debugging is also pretty straight forward in Swift than Objective-C. Security Photo by on Gustas Brazaitis Unsplash Swift removed pointers concept which improved the security and robustness of the programming language. As Objective-C is an old programming language, it has pointers concept like — C, C++ programming languages. The reason behind removing the pointers concept in swift is that pointers allow a great vulnerability towards our application for the Hackers. So all modern programming languages like — Java, Python, JavaScript, Kotlin etc. removed pointer concept in their language implementation. Speed Photo by on chuttersnap Unsplash When it comes to speed and performance, Swift is on the upper hand because it runs faster. According to Apple.inc, Swift is 2.6x faster than Objective-C and 8.4x faster than Python. Maintainance The file management of Objective-C is really an irritating process because we need to manage two separate files in Objective-C. Since Objective-C was created from C and it depends on C programming when it comes to changes and improvements. We have to maintain two separate files of code in order to improve the efficiency and the developing time of an application. To fix this issue Swift came up with LLVM ( ) to figure out the requirements and automatically complete the incremental builds. Low-Level Virtual Machine Dynamic Library Support Photo by on Iñaki del Olmo Unsplash Dynamic libraries help us to execute a chunk of code that can be linked to an app. The difference between dynamic libraries and static libraries is that dynamic libraries can be linked to any program during run-time. One of the biggest change in Swift is to switch from static libraries to dynamic libraries. Static Library Static libraries are linked at the last step of the compilation process after the program is placed in memory. As a result, the executable file must be recompiled in case any changes were applied to external files. Static libraries are also updated along with other updates like a new OS version. Dynamic Library Dynamic libraries are automatically included in the AppStore’s download package. The shared code is loaded once and can be used by a large number of programs. This code can be updated, changed or recompiled without recompiling the application that uses this library. Dynamic libraries are external to the app executable but they can include within the app bundle downloaded from the App Store. Dynamic libraries can update pieces of code directly in an app. It reduces the initial size of an app as it is loaded into memory since the external code is linked only when it is used. These libraries are not supported until IOS 8. Swift Playground Playground — Noun: A place where people can play. Photo by on Jeffrey Lin Unsplash Swift Playgrounds are very much helpful for the new programmers and developers as well. because it provides a very interactive environment to test our piece of code without running our whole application. It is one of the great features of IOS which is not available in android. Most of the people argue that playgrounds are not for beginners, but I feel it is very much helpful for developers. When I started my journey to learn IOS development, my first program was written in the playground and it also helped me a lot to learn swift programming language quickly. However, while developing my apps to test any logic or piece of code, I always use the playground to do my task. Swift comes with good memory management scheme over Objective-C because In Swift we don’t need to bother about managing memory because of ARC (Automatic reference counting) which automatically frees up the memory used by class instances which are no longer needed. handles most of the of your apps and allocates or deallocates on your behalf. Swift memory management memory But when it comes to Objective-C, it has two types of memory management techniques — Manual Retain Release. (MRR) Automatic reference counting. (ARC) In MRR, we need to manage the memory explicitly by keeping track of objects on our own. This is implemented using a model, known as reference counting. The only difference between MRR and ARC is that the retain and release is handled by us manually at present while its automatically taken care of later. In MRR we need to follow several rules to manage the memory which is really a nightmare for the programmer. Even though Objective-C has ARC Memory management mechanism, ARC is supported only within the Cocoa API. ARC does not provide support for Graphics APIs. Developers need to work hard to manage such things. To solve this problem Swift enhanced the memory management to support across all APIs, this enhancement helped most of the developers and programmers to spend less time on memory management. Those are the reasons which addicted me to change my core IOS Development environment to swift programming language from Objective-C. Conclusion Since Swift has many advantages over Objective-C and it is developed to give more freedom for developers, I changed my choice from Objective-C to Swift. After changing my language from Objective-C to Swift my development life became more simple and comfortable. That’s the reason why I love swift 😍more than Objective-C. If you didn’t try Swift you are really missing out a wonderful journey in your development career. That doesn’t mean Objective-C is not good for IOS development or it is going to die because for both the languages Apple is providing good support. But Swift is rapidly growing than Objective-C. If you have any experiences or any other information to share regarding this topic feel free to comment. Thanks for reading my article by killing your valuable time, I hope this article helped you to learn something new. If you liked this article please click on the clap and leave me your valuable feedback.

IOS Development: Objective-C vs Swift

The path for IOS Development is pretty simple and straight forward with Swift. When I started learning IOS development, I chose Objective-C as my core programming language. During my journey, I faced a lot of struggles with Objective-C because it is one of the toughest languages I had ever come across. It was a nightmare for me to develop apps with the help of Objective-C. The syntax of Objective-C is not very programmer friendly so it became very difficult for me to write and debug the code. Most of the beginners would also have the same problem with IOS development but when it comes to Android development things are very easy and it is like a cake walk because JAVA is much better than Objective-C to code. When I started my journey, Swift was already a booming thing in the market. Since Objective-C was an old programming language I thought that it had good resources and community to learn from. StackOverflow has a good community for Objective-C to deal with bugs and issues. For those reasons I chose Objective-C. Even though the resources and community are good, things were not happening in the way I wanted. So in the end, I got fed up with Objective-C and made a decision to change my core programming language to Swift because of some big reasons — As a Swift Programmer (Currently addicted to it 😍) I love to code in swift rather than Objective-C to build an IOS App from scratch. Because I found out that swift is more flexible than Objective-C. Swift was officially released in the year 2014 by Apple INC. Until 2014 IOS developers usually worked with Objective-C, an object-oriented superset of the C programming language that has been the core part for IOS development so far. But things are changed from 2014 because swift was introduced as a new programming language for IOS development that’s given IOS developers an alternative to choose Swift. Developers and programmers developed swift programming language with good syntactic sugar that employs modern programming language theory concepts and strives to present a simpler syntax. It is compatible with all of the existing IOS development tools like — XCode, Cocoa framework and many more. But it’s ease of use and improved features has helped swift to quickly replace Objective-C. This feature helps most of the beginners and developers to learn and develop new things quickly and easily. It’s designed to give developers more freedom than ever. In this article, we’ll explore a few reasons about why you should get started with the Swift programming language for your next iOS app development project if you haven’t already. You might already be an IOS developer with Objective-C background but we need to adopt the new changes quickly if they are good enough. The Quicker You Let Go Of Old Cheese, The Sooner You Can Enjoy New Cheese. — Dr. Spencer Johnson. The reasons for changing my core programming language to swift — Simplicity Photo by on rawpixel Unsplash Swift programming closely resembles natural English because of its good syntactic sugar. This readability makes it easier for existing programmers from JavaScript, Java, Python, R, and C++ to adopt Swift into their programming belt. Swift requires less code to perform the particular task but when it comes to Objective-C we need to write a verbose code to perform that same particular task. Debugging is also pretty straight forward in Swift than Objective-C. Photo by on Gustas Brazaitis Unsplash Swift removed pointers concept which improved the security and robustness of the programming language. As Objective-C is an old programming language, it has pointers concept like — C, C++ programming languages. The reason behind removing the pointers concept in swift is that pointers allow a great vulnerability towards our application for the Hackers. So all modern programming languages like — Java, Python, JavaScript, Kotlin etc. removed pointer concept in their language implementation. Speed Photo by on chuttersnap Unsplash When it comes to speed and performance, Swift is on the upper hand because it runs faster. According to Apple.inc, Swift is 2.6x faster than Objective-C and 8.4x faster than Python. Maintainance The file management of Objective-C is really an irritating process because we need to manage two separate files in Objective-C. Since Objective-C was created from C and it depends on C programming when it comes to changes and improvements. We have to maintain two separate files of code in order to improve the efficiency and the developing time of an application. To fix this issue Swift came up with LLVM ( ) to figure out the requirements and automatically complete the incremental builds. Low-Level Virtual Machine Dynamic Library Support Photo by on Iñaki del Olmo Unsplash Dynamic libraries help us to execute a chunk of code that can be linked to an app. The difference between dynamic libraries and static libraries is that dynamic libraries can be linked to any program during run-time. One of the biggest change in Swift is to switch from static libraries to dynamic libraries. Static Library Static libraries are linked at the last step of the compilation process after the program is placed in memory. As a result, the executable file must be recompiled in case any changes were applied to external files. Static libraries are also updated along with other updates like a new OS version. Dynamic Library Dynamic libraries are automatically included in the AppStore’s download package. The shared code is loaded once and can be used by a large number of programs. This code can be updated, changed or recompiled without recompiling the application that uses this library. Dynamic libraries are external to the app executable but they can include within the app bundle downloaded from the App Store. Dynamic libraries can update pieces of code directly in an app. It reduces the initial size of an app as it is loaded into memory since the external code is linked only when it is used. These libraries are not supported until IOS 8. Swift Playground Playground — Noun: A place where people can play. Photo by on Jeffrey Lin Unsplash Swift Playgrounds are very much helpful for the new programmers and developers as well. because it provides a very interactive environment to test our piece of code without running our whole application. It is one of the great features of IOS which is not available in android. Most of the people argue that playgrounds are not for beginners, but I feel it is very much helpful for developers. When I started my journey to learn IOS development, my first program was written in the playground and it also helped me a lot to learn swift programming language quickly. However, while developing my apps to test any logic or piece of code, I always use the playground to do my task. Swift comes with good memory management scheme over Objective-C because In Swift we don’t need to bother about managing memory because of ARC (Automatic reference counting) which automatically frees up the memory used by class instances which are no longer needed. handles most of the of your apps and allocates or deallocates on your behalf. Swift memory management memory But when it comes to Objective-C, it has two types of memory management techniques — Manual Retain Release. (MRR) Automatic reference counting. (ARC) In MRR, we need to manage the memory explicitly by keeping track of objects on our own. This is implemented using a model, known as reference counting. The only difference between MRR and ARC is that the retain and release is handled by us manually at present while its automatically taken care of later. In MRR we need to follow several rules to manage the memory which is really a nightmare for the programmer. Even though Objective-C has ARC Memory management mechanism, ARC is supported only within the Cocoa API. ARC does not provide support for Graphics APIs. Developers need to work hard to manage such things. To solve this problem Swift enhanced the memory management to support across all APIs, this enhancement helped most of the developers and programmers to spend less time on memory management. Those are the reasons which addicted me to change my core IOS Development environment to swift programming language from Objective-C. Conclusion Since Swift has many advantages over Objective-C and it is developed to give more freedom for developers, I changed my choice from Objective-C to Swift. After changing my language from Objective-C to Swift my development life became more simple and comfortable. That’s the reason why I love swift 😍more than Objective-C. If you didn’t try Swift you are really missing out a wonderful journey in your development career. That doesn’t mean Objective-C is not good for IOS development or it is going to die because for both the languages Apple is providing good support. But Swift is rapidly growing than Objective-C. If you have any experiences or any other information to share regarding this topic feel free to comment. Thanks for reading my article by killing your valuable time, I hope this article helped you to learn something new. If you liked this article please click on the clap and leave me your valuable feedback.

Stories, News & Mentions about BAZAIT

Bazait’s Stories on HackerNoon