Where C++ fits

We use C++ when the problem is latency, determinism, or long-lived native code — telecom stacks, performance services, integration with vendor SDKs, and systems that must survive years of production abuse.

• Real-time and near–real-time services — audio/video, signalling, device or exchange-adjacent logic.
• Thin abstraction — you need control over memory, threading, and build flags, not a thick runtime.
• Cross-platform native bases that later gain UIs (including Qt/QML when the product needs a serious desktop surface).

New systems vs extending an existing codebase

Greenfield C++ costs more at the start: build system, coding standards, threading model, logging, crash reporting, and first production release. Maintenance and extension is usually a stable monthly rhythm: triage, patch releases, refactors behind feature flags, and dependency upgrades — as long as technical debt is kept visible.

Engineering Leadership & Quality Standards

Every C++ pod ships with peer review cycles, CI/CD enforcement, and senior architectural oversight as baseline — not optional add-ons. On native code, seniors own concurrency, build/release, and integration boundaries; mids deliver bounded features under mandatory review; juniors contribute on tests, tooling, and well-scoped modules once patterns are established.

Representative delivery (on-page summary)

For Qt/QML-heavy desktop surfaces, the same operating model applies with more UI-specialised capacity.

Cost expectations

Software work is milestone-scoped — commercial shape is confirmed after discovery and aligns with our pricing page. Dedicated pod engineers sit under monthly GBP team economics via the Transparent 15% model — see role bands. Larger native programmes are split into phases so spend tracks risk.