[coldtea]

Nope, there are tons of other reasons.

Huge pool of programmers. Huge pool of libraries. Tons of existing code that should continue to run. Excellent documentation. Very fast compilers. Debuggers and profilers a plenty. Top notch vendor support. Choices of IDEs. Works great in embedded. Predictable.

The alternatives being what, e.g. Rust, a 5 year old language with a single implementation that still tries to find its place, and brings extra baggage to the table?

>Not take any risk but stick with tried and wrong tools.

Engineers don't take risks. You wouldn't want risks in the people building your bridges and planes, why would you want in your OSes and network infrastructure?

[blub]

Rust, D or Go could be alternatives, but they have limitations in certain domains and types of projects.

C++ doesn't though, and that's why traditional C projects switch. At least in automotive it seems to be the language of choice.