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

[ProtectAndHide]

On Monday, 30 January 2023 at 06:09:56 UTC, RTM wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 January 2023 at 23:19:35 UTC, ProtectAndHide 
> wrote:
>
>> That is, you can do OOP without classes
>
> How so? Every OOP definition includes classes (encapsulation + 
> inheritance).

I didn't say you should do it, just that you can do it ;-)

The OO languages make it 'non-ugly' for you to do it.

But there is always 'an ugly way' to do it too:

http://www.cs.rit.edu/~ats/books/ooc.pdf