Lint is not a whole program static analyzer and being free is a big deal.

Your -second- third paragraph is, unfortunately, still correct though.

Somehow other professionals manage to pay for what goes into their toolboxes, music case, kitchen knives, ....

How well the attendees of CppCon represent the developer base of C++ projects which are in dire needs of these tools?

Maybe they are so skilled the need does not arise?

One of the most eye-opening papers in this regard was the integer overflow checking paper (which Regehr was coauthor on), which found that every library tested invoked undefined signed integer overflow. This includes SQLite, infamous for its comprehensive testing, and various libraries whose sole purpose was to check if an operation would overflow without invoking undefined behavior.

Belief that you are skilled enough to write C/C++ code that doesn't exercise undefined behavior either shows that you don't know what is undefined behavior or that you believe you are the best programmer to have ever lived.

Even people who work on the language spec can't really avoid writing code that hits UB without the help of sanitizers.

The amount of CVEs found per month on highly skilled projecs, with deep review processes, like the Linux kernel proove otherwise.

As for how well, usually conferences like CppCon have the top of the tops.