[neonsunset]

Go and Rust are subject to linking too, Rust just happens to have a saner system which deals with it under the hood. It also goes through the same tooling C and C++ do and the subsequent object files may also need to be linked before producing a binary. Java and .NET's loading system are different since JVM uses loading at class granularity based on classpath whilst .NET uses assemblies, with Java, to my knowledge, moving towards modules which are similar a couple decades later (to also improve its startup latency). .NET's assembly system was made to directly address the pains of header/source file compilation and linking issues well-understood even back in the late 90s.

[pjmlp]

Java modules have nothing to do with that, rather not all packages are supposed to be public rather sub-packages as way to have clean implementations, but given the granularity, many developers end up relying on internals that were designed only for consumption from public APIs.

.NET Assemblies suffer from the same, unless you make use of some tricks like InternalsVisibleTo attribute.

During the .NET 1.0 days there was the idea to have components, for a role similar to how Java modules have come to fulfill, but it never took off, and the idea was confusing as many developers usually thought they related to COM, when they heard "components" alongside .NET.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/app-domai...