Well I have no source proper since it's just an opinion I hold and not a fact. But just looking at some of the comments in thread, they essentially boil down to:
"Dur I'm so smart, Rust makes this obsolete, C++ got it 'wrong'"
Like man, do you want a gold star? WE ALL KNOW ABOUT THE BORROW CHECKER. You're not informing anyone, you're just publicly masturbating on HN. 99% chance it's just some know-it-all talentless n00b who's proficient in JS and loves react.js.
"Wah!!! Move semantics make my bwain hoyt!! I got a segfault :( C++ makes me feel bad about myself. But it's okay because it's old and obsolete, Rust is better."
I think rust has its merits, don't get me wrong. I just think it has a large cargo cult following of inexperienced script kids who have never used it for anything other than pretending to know what they're taking about.
Ugh, if you bring up Rust in this thread it's clear you have little to no experience actually writing large amounts of system-level code. Rust has been around for all 2-3 years now? 1.0 for what? Months? What large successful Rust code bases have you worked on? What have you actually built with Rust?
C++ is for people who work on large mature codebases, deal with practical issues, and actually build stuff. Talk to me about the virtues of Rust when you actually have real experience.
I run Windows as a guest with vga passthrough and completely disable networking (though a very strict firewall could also work, e.g. For online games).
The nuance in "worse is better" is that it's about the approach, not the output. libav's approach is to focus on an elegant API and software architecture instead of focusing on development speed and features.
The output in the short term is that libav is riddled with bugs, the hope is that in the long term this will pay off. Unfortunately in the interim ffmpeg seems to have propelled ahead.