On 11/30/16, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
what about <autoaccessor>? I'd rather to have a way to identify non-human made code, whether transient or permanent.
The thing is, a human *did* made it by selecting that option off the menu.
+1
This type of tag should be for code that is generated unbeknownst to the developer, *and* which may be regenerated in the future.
+1
yeah, but its IMHO more appropriate to have "proper" metadata. I actually intended to make a new icon marker for those methods :)
Are you saying you want to identify *plain* getter/setter methods with an icon in the methods list? That way, as a developer, if I'm editing another method in the same class, then I could see that icon and, without having to select it, know that it is a simple accessor and not something more complex like lazily initialized. Sounds pretty good, at first..
Yes
however this should probably be done by analyzing the bytecodes, not by a tag, because there will be hundreds of simple accessors which would not have it, and a few which did but were not simple because the developer didn't remove the tag. It seems like it would be hard to come to rely on something so inaccurate.
--Hannes