Very interesting that you're using C++ and SVN rather than C# and VS/TFS - any reason for that other than licensing costs? We view C++ as a 'legacy' language.
.
There's a variety of reasons we prefer C++ over C#, One simple one is familiarity and pre-existing code, there's the ever-prevalent argument over memory usage/overall performance/etc which is too big to address here. I'm going to pick out two of the reasons, just to keep this post sensibly sized! (incidentally, do you mind if I ask what field of development you're in?)
Cross platform compatibility:
C# via Mono can run on most things, but in many cases won't be supported via the platform owner as much as talking natively to their C/C++ interfaces, whereas writing in C++ we can tailor the code to run on anything from an iPhone to a PC to consoles from different vendors spanning several generations, and expect it to be supported.
Low level access (especially cache and SIMD):
Certainly in the majority of cases you don't need to do detailed optimisation, in games you still do in various places. in tight loops we will occasionally make platform specific optimisations based on knowing how large cache lines are and how far in advance they can be prefetched. Or in the case of SIMD code, as far as I'm aware it simply doesn't exist in C# - according to a brief google (and I'm no expert on the language I'll admit) SIMD is starting to see use automatically by the VM on some platforms for combining simple operations, but for the vast amount of spatial code we write I've made extensive use of the hardware implemented (or at least microcoded) cross/dot products, shifts/permutes, vector length, etc - which end up giving order of magnitude speedups to intensive maths code.
In time as the VM improves these issues may be swept away

. I'm a big fan of the runtime-guided optimisations both the Java and C# VMs do, and in the majority of cases they do make it easier to write code that is fast with far less effort. But if you want to make the effort to get past fast into Blistering (or up into Ludicrous Speed!) - you need something else.
Review about the interview with Mark Allen.
Thank you very much for answering questions! And a special thank you for your answers after the interview, it is important to know (for me) that the developers are the same people as we are, and are participating in the discussions on the forum.
As a self-taught designer, I often meet with a situation where I create a product, but due to some bugs have to rewrite it, sometimes several times. Since you are new to the network application architecture, whether you have been such cases, that the core of the network architecture had to be rewritten to support more functionality?
You're very welcome
- It's a pleasant change for me as well, the projects I've worked on previously have all been under much tighter NDAs, it's nice to actually be able to interact with our players!
I end up rewriting code a great deal on the gameplay side where things change a lot based on iteration and feedback. You build things to be extensible but knowing a lot of it will have to be refactored/replaced at some point. Sadly without making the first version there's no way to tell which bits will need to be replaced!
The underlying network code I've not been significantly involved in, that was developed while I was on other projects and is structurally solid by now, with a few bugfixes as they come up. I can't really comment on earlier development of it.