4 ms·
Quick to call someone stupid, aren't we? Did you even try his code? Go try it. Just because a site doesn't have jQuery, doesn't mean $ isn't assigned to anythin
by elliottkember 13y ago
Quick to call someone stupid, aren't we? Did you even try his code? Go try it. Just because a site doesn't have jQuery, doesn't mean $ isn't assigned to anything.
- joshstrange 13y agoPretty sure cturhan did try jffry's code and that's why he wrote this code. The $ var on the page only returns the first instance that it matches so his code doesn't work. A less efficient but shorter way is: var interval = setInterval(function(){ var links = document.querySelectorAll('#problems a'); for(var z =0; z< links.length; z++) { $('#'+links[z].id).click(); } }, 1000); Also he never called him stupid he simply informed him that it didn't work.
- elliottkember 13y agoYou're right, sorry - it was the supercilious tone I objected to. In fact $() returns the first element and clicks it. Because it's in a setInterval, it continues to click the first <a> it finds every 100ms. Did you try it?
- tensaix2j 13y agoActually the oneliner does work. (Although it throws error when a is not found.) A quick fix would be setInterval(function(){ $("a") && $("a").click() }, 100)