"Yeah, maybe you were doing it wrong." I think you misread my comment which was pointing out that COM is an interfacing standard, and has little to nothing to

"Yeah, maybe you were doing it wrong." I think you misread my comment which was pointing out that COM is an interfacing standard, and has little to nothing to do with language choices or this conversation. Pointing out that there are multiple languages that can build to it isn't a counterpoint, but actually is the reason I made my comment. It's like saying you "developed the program in JSON over HTTP" in a conversation about programming languages. Though regardless of that, Microsoft uses C++ for the overwhelming majority of a Windows install (this is trivial to verify). This is meaningless, having nothing to do with the root comment, but somehow this conversation was pulled there. Windows programs can be written in just about anything. No one ever contested that. "Low-level" code, however, is seldom done in the GC languages. Seldom doesn't mean never, as stated over and over again, and Googling for random fringe counterexamples aren't counterpoints.