<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>maxmcd</author><text>This formatting style for annotated sources always seems to work so well: &lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;robflaherty.github.io&amp;#x2F;jquery-annotated-source&amp;#x2F;docs&amp;#x2F;01-core.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;robflaherty.github.io&amp;#x2F;jquery-annotated-source&amp;#x2F;docs&amp;#x2F;01...&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>cryptoz</author><text>Very neat content, but does it have to be formatted like this? I respect that it preserves the original file, but it makes it very difficult to read. Comments added to the source code would serve much better for the purposes of understanding the code.&lt;p&gt;This tool makes it impossible to read the annotation and the source code at the same time. Clicking on &amp;#x27;set&amp;#x27; for example, about 20-30 lines in, lets you read the annotation, but not the function. You have to hide the annotation to read the code.&lt;p&gt;Wouldn&amp;#x27;t inline&amp;#x2F;multiline comments be so much better than this?&lt;p&gt;Edit: Citation&amp;#x2F;example: &lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;i.imgur.com&amp;#x2F;CHOFGML.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;i.imgur.com&amp;#x2F;CHOFGML.png&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>John Resig annotates original jQuery source code</title><url>http://genius.com/5088475</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>jasonlotito</author><text>Came here to say this.  I cannot fathom how this is considered usable at all.  There are also times that you click on the block of code to read, and it sends you back to the top of the page.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m more interested now in how this application got pushed to production in its current state.</text><parent_chain><item><author>cryptoz</author><text>Very neat content, but does it have to be formatted like this? I respect that it preserves the original file, but it makes it very difficult to read. Comments added to the source code would serve much better for the purposes of understanding the code.&lt;p&gt;This tool makes it impossible to read the annotation and the source code at the same time. Clicking on &amp;#x27;set&amp;#x27; for example, about 20-30 lines in, lets you read the annotation, but not the function. You have to hide the annotation to read the code.&lt;p&gt;Wouldn&amp;#x27;t inline&amp;#x2F;multiline comments be so much better than this?&lt;p&gt;Edit: Citation&amp;#x2F;example: &lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;i.imgur.com&amp;#x2F;CHOFGML.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;i.imgur.com&amp;#x2F;CHOFGML.png&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>John Resig annotates original jQuery source code</title><url>http://genius.com/5088475</url></story>