One of the most famous personal robot (Nao) uses an Intel x86 processor, which is bigger and uses more power than a Pi.

is all you need

That's what I download in 10 minutes.

I don't what that has to do with it. They use a real build system, not the IDE

I'm not saying people shouldn't use the Visual C++ compiler. You probably need to use it to meet some ABI requirements.
I'm just pointing out it's just not a very good compiler. It's something you suffer.

It's funny you mention that it's good at inline assembly. I've personally found it to be very bad, it's like a huge barrier to optimization and static analysis. It's more complex in GCC because you need to specify exactly what registers are affected, but at least it still inter-operates with the rest of the language pretty well.
VC++ dropped inline assembly in x86_64 anyway.

I already explained why I asked you to give one example that is open-source.
Because the other examples you and I could give are not code we both have access to.

You seem to be completely off topic there

Small disclaimer: I am part of the C++ standards committee, know a couple of the people behind MSVC, am a Boost contributor, and I am one of the founders of a company specialized in software optimization, in particular by designing domain-specific C++ tools.

MSVC is a terrible compiler, be it at standard compliance, compilation speed, diagnostics or optimization. Its standard library, despite the best intents of its author, is also full of bugs and is developed using fairly antiquated C++ techniques.
Intel is fairly bad at compilation speed, and while it does well at optimizing some specific patterns of code, it is generally not as reliable as clang or gcc for the optimization of general-purpose code.

GCC and Clang are the reference, what other compilers should strive to be, and what sane C++ developers should use.

All of which are pretty insignificant and have better alternatives anyway.
"grep" isn't really what makes an operating system.

Arguably a compiler is pretty important, but it is not tightly coupled with the OS at all, and clang is gaining weight.

Right. An implementation of the standard C library is what makes an OS now.

Commercial software is no exception (unless you mean iphone apps or shareware, but I'm talking about serious software here).

The advantage of open source software is that the source is open, so it's a example that talks to everybody.

I could talk to you about the experience I've had at many companies that develop C++ software, but we don't share that experience.

And GNOME isn't the only DE on what people call GNU/Linux.

Name one major open-source project where that is the case.

Natural language is both ambiguous and unprecise.

Converting it to a programming language forces you to be specific about what you really want.

Using computers is not something you learn in school. It's something you further every day as you use new tools and their documentation.