In my proposed way to bootstrap a compiler, you still write the compiler in the language you wish to compile. You also write an interpreter, rather than another

In my proposed way to bootstrap a compiler, you still write the compiler in the language you wish to compile. You also write an interpreter, rather than another compiler for the same source language, written in some other language for which a compiler already exists. This means that the amount of code you are writing to get the language up and running is smaller, since interpreters are easier to write than a whole second compiler. So what you say is true--it is a good way to see how the language feels--but not relevant to the facet of language development I was musing about.