> 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.

This type of tag should be for code that is generated unbeknownst to
the developer, *and* which may be regenerated in the future.

> 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..   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.