ok, so i understand a little bit now how the sorting of points works,
and i have even managed to sort a list of points. but only by using
the x component. how would i sort by the y, or z component?
On Oct 10, 2:45 am, David Rutten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can only sort things which have stable (in)equality and smaller-
> than/larger-than relationships. The most common example is numbers,
> but it is also possible to sort text (of course under the hood, text
> is numbers as well). If you need to sortpoints, what you're actually
> doing is extracting all the x-coordinates (numbers), andsortingthat
> list instead. In the meantime, you make sure that whenever you swap
> two numbers in the keys list in order to improve the ascending nature
> of the list, you also swap the same twopoints. That way, you can sort
> a list ofpoints.
>
> Another example would be to sort curves. Curves themselves are not
> very comparable, so instead you calculate the length for each curve
> (you get a list of numbers), sort the length array and simultaneously
> sort the curve array. Let's say we have 6 curves, each of which with
> the different length:
>
> {L, XS, M, XL, S, XXL}
>
> the lengths are:
>
> {50, 1, 25, 60, 5, 200}
>
> If we sort the list of numbers, we get a very predictable:
>
> {1, 5, 25, 50, 60, 200}
>
> and if we make sure that the cure list is kept 'in synch' during the
> the sort-operation, it will have become:
>
> {XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL}
>
> The list that is used forsortingis called the 'keys-list', the list
> that is sorted synchronously is called the 'values-list'.
>
> Often the hardest thing is to create a meaningful keys-list,
> especially if you need to sort a multi-dimensional dataset as opposed
> to a linear one...
>
> --
> David Rutten
> Robert McNeel & Associates
>
> On Oct 10, 8:05 am, oompa_l <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > thanks taz. it seemed like it should be extremely easy, I just
> > couldn't figure it out. Still, I have to admit that I dont really
> > understand what the sorted "keys" are...it doesnt sound like you're
> > completely certain either.
>
> > thanks
> > G
