Greasy Fork

Can you add support for working in the mobile version of the interface?

Script has been updated to support mobile site layout

@jcunews, now it doesn't work even in the full version.

Check the update.

@jcunews, all the same. Maybe our devices load different layouts? Could this be possible?

If you have other browser extensions and/or UserScripts, try disabling them.

@jcunews, I tried it, it didn't help. Can you look at the search results page as an html file if I download it and send it to you?

No need. I can test it myself. It's just that, it's a bit difficult & tedious to get Google to present the problematic page layout from desktop browser, and it's not practical to debug script in mobile device. Check the updated script.

@jcunews, not working

Check the updated script again for yet-another mobile layout. I honestly don't know how many layouts does Google have for mobile. It at least have 3 of them. If it's deemed too many, I might drop support for mobile layout.

@jcunews, but after all the script stopped working and in the desktop layout, after the first change to the script, after my request to add support for the mobile layout.

Could it be an issue with ad blocking? I use AdGuard, also as a script manager.

but after all the script stopped working and in the desktop layout

Are you saying that, even in the desktop layout, the script doesn't work? If so, then other UserScript or browser extension is likely interfering with the script directly or indirectly, or changes page HTML element IDs/classes/attributes which are used by the script to identify things - such as getting the correct link element, getting the reference element for placing the down-arrow icon.

The script stopped working in the desktop layout from version 1.1.17, that is, after adding support for the mobile layout. Now I installed version 1.1.16 for the second time and it works in the desktop version.

By the way, can you show a screenshot of the script buttons in the mobile layout? It's very interesting what it should look like.

then other UserScript or browser extension is likely

I use Google Chrome and Opera on Android 7, and as is known, they do not support extensions. I tried disabling other user scripts - to no avail.

Firefox and Chrome/ium and its clones are entirely separate applications with entirely separate web browser profile. Anything installed in Firefox does not and will not affect other web browser applications.

Here's mobile layout screenshot on my actual Samsung Galaxy A7 (Android 8) phone:

https://i.imgur.com/iFumMa3.png

Desktop layout:

https://i.imgur.com/AX4hX3H.png

Simulated Samsung Galaxy S20 mobile layout on desktop:

https://i.imgur.com/q9LkJ0k.png

Simulated Apple IPhone 12/13 mobile layout on desktop:

https://i.imgur.com/gUnWbHl.png

Anything installed in Firefox does not and will not affect other web browser applications.

Hmm, what does Firefox have to do with it? I don't use it. Scripts are implemented via AdGuard. It has such a function and it is described as “AdGuard can extend websites functionality working as a cross-browser userscript manager”. Some other scripts from this site work. The official AdGuard website lists several sites as sources of custom scripts, and greasyfork is one of them.

I don't use AdGuard either. AdGuard is not the only UserScript provider browser extension, and is certainly not the leading UserScript provider browser extension.

Not all UserScript provider browser extensions are GreaseMonkey (GM) compatible, and/or are proper implementation of UserScript provider where it does not provide full access to both site page HTML and DOM. One example of it, is FireMonkey browser extension. Some are GM compatible and provide full access to site page HTML, but don't provide full access to DOM.

UserScripts (depending on what they do), may not work as intended if the UserScript provider browser extension does not provide the necessary functions and access level. It'd be like a race driver using an improperly made race car. Depending on the car, he may never reach the finish line.

So far, I only acknowledge two properly implemented UserScript provider browser extensions: ViolentMonkey and TamperMonkey; and they are among the top 3. I no longer acknowledge GreaseMonkey browser extension even though it's the official and the origin of GM, because it breaks its own GM API. FYI chronologically, GreasyMonkey was the first (2005), TamperMonkey was the second (2010), and ViolentMonkey (2013) was the third. FireMonkey (2016) has the potential to be the fourth one if it fixes its implementation.