Non-ugly ways to implement a 'static' class or namespace?

[bachmeier]

On Thursday, 16 February 2023 at 21:23:53 UTC, ProtectAndHide 
wrote:

> Forcing programmers to use a design mechanism rather than a 
> language mechanism to achieve the above abstraction is wrong. 
> This seems to be the source of the disagreement, correct?

There's no disagreement. It's you posting the same false claim 
again and again (presumably because you're hoping it will come up 
when someone does a search for it, or some similar reason) and 
others explaining why you're wrong.

If you don't want to use the language, don't use it. You have 
your subjective preferences. You are unable to muster a good 
argument in favor of it. There's no reason to (yet again) post 
the same thing over and over.