Is there a better term than "dummy" to describe a non-functional part of a program?

I'm searching for a different or more neutral term than "dummy" to describe a non-functional or non-interactive part of a program.

I've been using this term to refer to code in interactive charts and data visualizations that has no meaningful value, but helps render visual effects that would be hard or cumbersome to create using outside code or more complex methods.

For example, if one series in my chart is just there to add a set of arrow-shaped markers, I've been calling it a "dummy series" (always in quotes).

The third definition of "dummy" on Wiktionary (https://simple.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/dummy) seems to agree with my usage ...

A dummy is something that is not there but people act like its there for some purpose.

... but I'm not 100% comfortable using "dummy" due to its alternate meaning of "stupid" or "unintelligent."

Thank you in advance for your suggestions.

Solution 1:

The terms ancillary, auxiliary, or supplementary should work better.

Ancillary: providing something additional to a main part or function

Auxiliary: available to provide extra help, power, etc., when it is needed

supplementary: Completing or enhancing something

You can also simply say nonessential:

not completely necessary : not essential

Solution 2:

One term that is often used in programming is stub.

That is "filler" for a portion of the program that is not yet written.

Solution 3:

I'm a fan of "inert."

It's definition isn't 100 percent literal:

From Dictionary.com:

Inert

having no inherent power of action, motion, or resistance (opposed to active)