Why they don't just invest in carbonlang instead?
Rust is already a good systems language and is getting adoption. D is a great c++-alike already and for 20 (?) years.
There is a mature C++ toolchain for any processor and OS you can imagine.
Simply adopting a different C++ compiler or a newer version of one you are already using can take many months for a large company. Migration to even Carbon would probably take 10x as much effort.
Second, it is mostly a Google thing for their C++ use, it is still mostly a frontend implementation at this point, with semantics yet to be fully defined.
They are also open that Carbon is basically an experiment.
Does it mean that the compiler is more than just a frontend? Or maybe I don't understand what a frontend is?
Frontend in a compiler, is what converts the text code representation of the language into some intermediary format, usually a graph or intermediate language, that is than further processed for type checking and other semantic analysis, suffering other transformations in the process, until fed into the backend, which takes it from there for the further phases required to generate machine code.
https://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/MyFirstLanguageFrontend/index...
I don't understand why you provided that link to goldbolt though? What was it supposed to demonstrate?
Also, you said that one need a backend for a frontend (to be useful I guess). Do you mean to say that the "Carbon" frontend does not have any backend to work with?
I am sorry I bothered you with my annoying questions..