What do you call a class not intended to be instantiated

[Aaron "Castironpi" Brady]

On Sep 22, 6:55 pm, MRAB <goo... at mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
> On Sep 22, 11:46 pm, "Aaron \"Castironpi\" Brady"
>
>
>
> <castiro... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 22, 5:32 pm, Steven D'Aprano <st... at REMOVE-THIS-
>
> > cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:41:46 +1000, James Mills wrote:
> > > > On 22 Sep 2008 09:07:43 GMT, Steven D'Aprano
> > > >> But that's precisely what I want to avoid: I don't want the objects to
> > > >>  share *any* state, not even their class. I'm not trying for a Borg or
> > > >>  Singleton: the user can call the factory as many times as they want,
> > > >>  but the objects returned shouldn't share any state. I don't know if
> > > >>  what I want has a name. Judging from people's reactions, I'd say
> > > >>  probably not.
>
> > > > Snce when are "users" ever involved
> > > > in programming problems or programming languages ?
>
> > > What an astounding question.
>
> > > Consider a class. There are the programmers who write the class, and
> > > there are the programmers (possibly the same people, but not necessarily)
> > > who use the class. The second set of people, the programmers who use the
> > > class, are *users* of the class. What else would they be?
>
> > > --
> > > Steven
>
> > Usegrammers?
>
> And professionals are programmers, amateurs are amgrammers and newbies
> are newgrammers? :-)

Not to be rude, but no.  Usegrammers usegram.