I disagree about this point:
I wouldn't call it a `singleton`, because in case of replication the
"instance class" might have multiple instances and therefore isn't a
singleton.
[laszlo-reviews -> laszlo-dev]
I'll try to look at this in just a bit, but I had a thought:
I wonder if instead of `anonymous` we should use `singleton`, I think that might be more
descriptive/accurate. An "instance class" as we have been calling it is really
an instance of a singleton class, a class that will only ever have this one instance as a
member, so we don't give it a tag name (which is why we think of it as anonymous).
