Ok, here's some code I used :
And this is the result I got :Code:var transformedSurfaces:Array=surfaces.sortOn("depth",Array.DESCENDING|Array.NUMERIC); for(var i:int=0;i<transformedSurfaces.length;i++) { trace(transformedSurfaces[i].depth); }
Note that there's a zero out of place.Code:205.44603367212753 182.78833899621128 160.130644320295 138.99973123326004 138.99973123326004 138.99973123326004 138.99973123326004 138.99973123326004 138.99973123326004 114.81525496846251 114.81525496846251 114.81525496846251 92.15756029254628 92.15756029254628 90.63077870366499 90.63077870366499 90.63077870366499 73.72604823403702 69.49986561663002 48.368952529595056 48.36895252959505 48.36895252959505 48.36895252959505 37.47373675257102 37.47373675257102 30.242796788862044 30.242796788862044 24.18447626479752 24.18447626479752 1.5267815888812777 0 0 0 0 0 -24.184476264797524 -24.184476264797524 -24.184476264797524 -42.26182617406994 -42.26182617406994 -46.84217094071377 -48.36895252959505 -48.36895252959505 -48.36895252959505 0 -82.178413468851 -82.178413468851 -82.178413468851 -2.5357095704441965 -8.452365234813989 -89.10399711478371 -90.63077870366499 -90.63077870366499 -21.130913087034973 -31.696369630552457 -132.89260487773493 -132.89260487773493 -137.47294964437876 -138.99973123326006 -138.99973123326006 -138.99973123326006 -157.07708114253245 -172.80919217251602 -172.80919217251602 -172.80919217251602 -181.26155740733 -181.26155740733 -181.26155740733 -205.44603367212753 -223.52338358139994 -228.10372834804377 -263.43997087618095 -263.43997087618095 -263.43997087618095 -271.89233611099496 -271.89233611099496 -271.89233611099496 -314.15416228506496 -362.52311481465995 -362.52311481465995 -362.52311481465995 -362.52311481465995 -362.52311481465995 -362.52311481465995 -404.7849409887299 -495.41571969239493 -495.41571969239493 -495.41571969239493 -495.41571969239493 -495.41571969239493 -495.41571969239493 -495.41571969239493
I also tried a simple Array.sort(Array.DESCENDING|Array.NUMERIC), and had the toString() function of my objects return the depth field, and that way it was accurate but a lot slower.
So, any ideas?
Thanks.




Reply With Quote