What is the effect of setting the association end ownership from \"association\" to \"classifier\" on the code that gets generated?
In other words,
0) I star
Ownership means that class or its instance has not only reachable way to instance of another class, but has it as an attribute (direct reference or simply contains it). Ownership does NOT belong to strict features of UML.
In C++ instance A can have the B instance not by pointer, but directly. There is NO special UML sign for it, it should be shown in the same way as normal, pointer attribute.
I think the convention you are trying to deal with is now deprecated.
Navigability notation was often used in the past according to an informal convention, whereby non-navigable ends were assumed to be owned by the association whereas navigable ends were assumed to be owned by the classifier at the opposite end. This convention is now deprecated.
Source: www.site.uottawa.ca
I could give you a general approach about how a general UML 2 source code generator might work (UML spec doesn't specify how to generate code from UML models)
From my point of view, if the association ends (property) belongs to the UML class, then a field should be generated in the source code class, whereas if it belongs to the association no field is generated (allows you to model unidirectional or bidirectional associations between classes). Have a look to the example I've recently posted