Aesthetics. Annotations are just uglier than modifiers. Due to their special syntax instead of just a naked keyword.
If the language has annotations already, then you have paid the tax of having “special syntax” in your language in any case.
(Except Swift maybe, which has “attributes” andmore than 200 keywords.)
Annotations take up more space
I don’t consider this a drawback. In fact, many languages with modifiers have the same rules about modifier placement.
I actually want annotations on their own line, such that all my actual keywords start at the same column.
Disorder
Many languages with modifiers have the exact same issue, and address the issue the same way I’d address it for annotations:
Define a desired order of annotations and let the compiler/linter/IDE/formatter deal with it.
Downgrading
Let the IDE/editor pick a different color for you “more important” annotations, if you like.
“your language should not have modifiers, do annotations instead” instead of “if your language has both, remove modifiers”
That’s just nitpicking the wording. Ok.
Namespacing … is not objectively better. I don’t want to import “public” in every single file.
Then don’t? Most languages don’t make you import String either.
Namespacing … Or even worse, a non-annotation (function, class) named “public”.
Have a separate namespace for for annotations, or treat @ as part of the name.
Though it’s not something I would spend effort on – sometimes the best answer to “X does not work” is “then don’t”.
Variable declarations do have modifiers too (for example “const” in C).
I’m not looking to argue about the importance of my points. I wouldn’t have listed so many in that case.
The point I’m trying to make is that this is a very incomplete article, as it doesn’t seem that much thought was put on the downsides.
A good article would’ve considered every angle. And so would probably conclude (if it had a conclusion) that the premise is incorrect, and the world of language design is more nuanced than “having both modifiers and annotations is bad language design”.
And at that point, the article would’ve probably ended up being: when should annotations be used instead of modifiers?
Many of the most popular languages have both modifiers and annotations:
Java
Rust
Python
*Javascript
C doesn’t have both because it doesn’t even have annotations. Idk about C++, but it either doesn’t have annotations (like C) or it should be in the list above
All of those have been heavily criticized from a language design PoV. And I’ve never seen anyone complain about this. People genuinely don’t believe this to be an issue.
The closest is publicstaticintmain() for java. But making them annotations would not fix that, only rearrange the issue vertically.
The point I’m trying to make is that this is a very incomplete article, as it doesn’t seem that much thought was put on the downsides.
I could mentioned additional points in favor for the same reason you mentioned your points against, but at some point one has to stop and decide whether any minor, additional points made would sway the overall verdict.
Many of the most popular languages have both modifiers and annotations:
I have a separate blog post in which I consider when “popularity” or “familiarity” should be considered when it comes to language design.
C doesn’t have both because it doesn’t even have annotations. Idk about C++, but it either doesn’t have annotations (like C)
Both C and C++ have annotations. They are called “attributes” in their language, as mentioned in the footnote linked from the blog post’s first sentence.
People genuinely don’t believe this to be an issue.
The closest is publicstaticintmain() for java.
If you look at Java-inspired languages like Scala or Kotlin, neither of them have public (made the default) nor static (replaced by companion objects).
Ok, then here’s a short answer to your points:
If the language has annotations already, then you have paid the tax of having “special syntax” in your language in any case.
(Except Swift maybe, which has “attributes” and more than 200 keywords.)
I don’t consider this a drawback. In fact, many languages with modifiers have the same rules about modifier placement.
I actually want annotations on their own line, such that all my actual keywords start at the same column.
Many languages with modifiers have the exact same issue, and address the issue the same way I’d address it for annotations:
Define a desired order of annotations and let the compiler/linter/IDE/formatter deal with it.
Let the IDE/editor pick a different color for you “more important” annotations, if you like.
That’s just nitpicking the wording. Ok.
Then don’t? Most languages don’t make you import
Stringeither.Have a separate namespace for for annotations, or treat
@as part of the name.Though it’s not something I would spend effort on – sometimes the best answer to “X does not work” is “then don’t”.
I replaced …
const foo: Foo = ...… with …
@constantValue let foo: Foo = ...… in my language a short while ago. It’s fine.
I’m not looking to argue about the importance of my points. I wouldn’t have listed so many in that case.
The point I’m trying to make is that this is a very incomplete article, as it doesn’t seem that much thought was put on the downsides.
A good article would’ve considered every angle. And so would probably conclude (if it had a conclusion) that the premise is incorrect, and the world of language design is more nuanced than “having both modifiers and annotations is bad language design”.
And at that point, the article would’ve probably ended up being: when should annotations be used instead of modifiers?
Many of the most popular languages have both modifiers and annotations:
C doesn’t have both because it doesn’t even have annotations. Idk about C++, but it either doesn’t have annotations (like C) or it should be in the list above
All of those have been heavily criticized from a language design PoV. And I’ve never seen anyone complain about this. People genuinely don’t believe this to be an issue.
The closest is
public static int main()for java. But making them annotations would not fix that, only rearrange the issue vertically.I could mentioned additional points in favor for the same reason you mentioned your points against, but at some point one has to stop and decide whether any minor, additional points made would sway the overall verdict.
I have a separate blog post in which I consider when “popularity” or “familiarity” should be considered when it comes to language design.
Both C and C++ have annotations. They are called “attributes” in their language, as mentioned in the footnote linked from the blog post’s first sentence.
If you look at Java-inspired languages like Scala or Kotlin, neither of them have
public(made the default) norstatic(replaced by companion objects).