Welcome to the Treehouse Community
Want to collaborate on code errors? Have bugs you need feedback on? Looking for an extra set of eyes on your latest project? Get support with fellow developers, designers, and programmers of all backgrounds and skill levels here with the Treehouse Community! While you're at it, check out some resources Treehouse students have shared here.
Looking to learn something new?
Treehouse offers a seven day free trial for new students. Get access to thousands of hours of content and join thousands of Treehouse students and alumni in the community today.
Start your free trialPeter Logan
2,597 PointsDoing the same action to children of a node through looping.
I don't understand what I am doing wrong! I am supposed to color all the p elements that are children of the section element by looping, but I messed something up. Can someone look at my code?
const section = document.querySelector('section');
let paragraphs = section.children;
for (var i = 0; i <= paragraphs; i++) {
paragraphs[i].style.color = "blue";
}
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>Child Traversal</title>
</head>
<body>
<section>
<p>This is the first paragraph</p>
<p>This is a slightly longer, second paragraph</p>
<p>Shorter, last paragraph</p>
</section>
<footer>
<p>© 2016</p>
</footer>
<script src="app.js"></script>
</body>
</html>
1 Answer
Alexandra Barnett
Front End Web Development Techdegree Graduate 46,473 PointsHi Peter! You've almost got it! There are two small things that need to be changed:
- because your i variable starts at zero, the next part of the for loop will be i < paragraphs rather than <=. If you started i at 1, yours would be correct.
- As it's an array that you are looping through, it will be i < paragraphs.length because the code doesn't know how many times to loop round without a number (which is what .length gives you):
const section = document.querySelector('section');
let paragraphs = section.children;
for (var i = 0; i < paragraphs.length; i++) {
paragraphs[i].style.color = "blue";
}
I hope that kind of makes sense :). Let me know if you have any questions!
Peter Logan
2,597 PointsPeter Logan
2,597 PointsThank you! I knew I was missing something simple.