But: if it's a completely new language (no backward compatibility to C++) - why do we need this? Can't we just use one of those new languages that are already available (Rust, Zig, Odin, Nim, just to name a few).
Would backwards compatibility to "modern C++" make more sense than no backwards compatibility?
There are probably also strong non-rational components, e.g. C++ people would like to keep working on C++, leveraging their existing skills and status, rather than jump to another community.
(btw., since debate initiated, C++ standard attempts on garbage collection too - as well as on many powerful concepts incorporated into C# from here and there - and IL is compiled into machine code before execution, naturally, also making C# really had an intention of making a better but similar C/C++ without its crippling compatibility barriers towards improvements. C++ is more universal still - but considerably less than C - and it is all right, each have advantage here and there. You usually do not work on all use cases anyway! ;) No need to abandon backward compatibility with C++, abandoning will become a new language, we have quite a few already, it is done already!)
C++ compiles to native code via LLVM bitcode.
what if you actually do like templates and class-based OOP ?