CppFront compiles to C++ and everything is intended to map to clean usable C++ code so that if the project fails, the code is still salvageable in its C++ form.
I think you're removing all context and constructing a false equivalency
According to wikipedia, Eiffel was created in 1986, making it a contemporary with C++'s initial development. From what I can tell, it's creator had no affiliation with the development of C/C++, and it was created for reasons completely unrelated to C++.
CppFront was created by the C++ committee chairman for the explicit goal of providing a path forward for C++. Herb explicitly stated that the inspiration for using C++ as a compilation target was taken from Bjarne's initial implementation of C++, which compiled to C.
Nope, I am making a point that plenty of languages have as goal to compile to C++, Eiffel was only an example from many others I could have chosen from.
The way Herb Sutter tries to sell Cppfront, versus all those other languages that have backends capable of generating C++, is exactly that, as ISO C++ chairman he is trying to portray Cppfront isn't like the others, given his position.
Hasn't as it is, he would use the same terms as the Carbon and Val folks.
It's not intended as a separate language.