About 20 years ago, I accidentally solved a similar problem. I created a Windows application using Visual Studio with MFC without thinking very far into the future. It turns out that I still maintain that application - and a few spinoffs of it - to this day. VS and MFC turned out to be a good choice for this system.
I've had to do some migration work every few years as newer versions of VS came out, but that's been tolerable. For example, I recently migrated from VS 2003 to VS 2010 because 2003 doesn't run correctly on Windows 7. And I recently made a transition to Unicode, which was slightly painful but tolerable - definitely the right thing to do at this point.
VS may not actually be the best answer to the question, but my experience does illustrate a few points. It worked for me because:
- The IDE had a large user base and ran on a ubiquitous platform.
- The framework, MFC, likewise has a large user base. Microsoft doesn't seem to care much about MFC anymore, but it's easy for them to maintain with each new version of VS. Basically, as long as VS, C++, and the Win32 API is around, it makes sense for them to update MFC whenever they update VS. Typically, they just add new features for new API things I don't use like the "Ribbon" interface. That's easy enough for me to ignore.
- Migrating to the new version of the system every few years makes sense. I don't do this with every version of VS, but I do it with every 2 or 3. Microsoft more-or-less forced me to do this when old versions of VS would no longer run, but it's actually been good for me overall. However, if I had somehow managed to continually use VS as it existed 20 years, the pain of migrating to a modern version today might be too great.