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

[ProtectAndHide via Digitalmars-d-learn]

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