On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 7:35 PM Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 03:43:03PM +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > > > Yes, although I'd love to have a good term for "there is only ever one > > object of this type AND VALUE", rather than "there is only one object > > of this type", so that True and False could be discussed the same way > > as singletons. > > I believe that the "official" Design Pattern name for something that > generalisations the Singleton pattern to two or more instances is the > Multiton: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiton_pattern > > but most people just use the term "singleton" in the sense that there is > only a single True and a single False. Or sometimes "dupleton" or > "doubleton". > > Another term sometimes used is "flyweight", which is also used for > interned strings and ints. > > https://python-patterns.guide/gang-of-four/flyweight/
Fair enough. I'll try to remember that one. Useful term, although a little less than intuitive. > What would you call a class that has *no* instances? Obviously that > would only be useful in a language where classes are first-class > citizens. Why create a singleton instance if you can just use the class > object itself? > Based on the way Java seems to use it, probably "namespace" would be the best term. Effectively, a class that never gets instantiated is a storehouse for static methods, which means it's basically what Python would do with a module full of top-level functions. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/LCKZZRN2VR6PVZ4HC2Q5THNQR6WR6KZI/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
