[Jsr308-statements] annotations on code blocks

[Eugene Kuleshov]

Trevor Harmon wrote:
> Yes, but that's because there's a semantic difference between:
>
> @MyAnnotation int foo() { }
> and:
> int foo() @MyAnnotation { }
>
> (The first one annotates the method declaration, while the second one 
> annotates the return type.)
>
> In contrast, I don't see any semantic difference between these:
>
> @ReadOnly for(...) { ... }
> for(...) @ReadOnly { ... }
> for(...) { ... } @ReadOnly
>
> Anyway, my point is that throughout Java 5 and 6, annotations have 
> been exclusively prefix, so if it's only a question of syntax and not 
> of semantics, we should continue the prefix tradition.
  I agree that it would be nice to follow existing tradition. Though it 
has been pointed out that prefix annotations don't work too well for 
annotating types and I attempted to try how postfix annotations would 
work for all newly introduced locations.

  regards,
  Eugene