[aidenn0]

> I'm more concerned with someone being able to build a set of shared libraries on their distribution of choice and those shared libraries being able to interact naturally regardless of which compiler s/he uses to build each of them.

Sorry, but this is an unreasonable standard. Literally no language, including C supports this. With C it only works inasmuch as the C compiler authors work really hard to make it works, and even then it sometimes breaks (if your compiler inlines a call to malloc, and you free a pointer compiled with a different C Compiler that inlined a different malloc implementation, it can break horribly. Yes I've seen this happen.)

Some languages support cross-version linking (or whatever the language's equivalent of "linking" is), but I'm not aware of any that specify a complete ABI for unrelated implementations to support. IPC libraries do typically support this though.

[edit]

I don't want to go on a shared-library rant, but I am fairly strongly opposed to them (except perhaps in cases like how nixos manages it). You can take a statically linked binary from 1997 and run it unmodified on your linux machine today. It is a virtual guarantee that any dynamically-linked binary more than 2 years old will not work correctly. Linus puts a huge amount of effort into backwards compatibility, and it is completely destroyed by dynamic linking.