I think you're also missing my point. Techniques like what you describe are exactly what I was referring when I said "C++ possess[es] ways" and "using friends rather than methods", although you don't even need a wrapper for a reference (which is actually a pointer, and so also part of what I mean by "pointer soup"!) for this sort of code: just the struct works fine (although a `class` does too, the only difference is the `struct` keyword has different privacy defaults).

The only "downgrade" I made was saying that it is only "almost" the default in C++, versus the other two where they are completely the default.

To be clear, like C and Rust, C++ has great semantic attributes for this sort of thing:

- classes/structs that don't require allocation/pointers

- precise control over pass-by-value (for everything except the `this` pointer of methods)

- pervasive static dispatch of methods/functions (including operators, which can be considered to be method/function with an unusual name and call syntax)

The only downside, and the reason I said "almost" (which is what the C++ETF (C++ Evangelism Task Force) seems to be up in arms about), is methods are what most people reach for by default and so the `this` pointer comes into play. But as you point out, and as I implied in my original comment, this isn't required, just the default.