HP QTP10 cannot read Automation values of Advanced DataGrid

Question

Hi everyone,
We're an Automation functional testing team, testing a flex application with HP QTP v10. So far we've successfully automated many parts of the application. Now, we're struck at a serious issue.
The issue is QTP cannot read automation values specified for an Advanced Datagrid (ADG).
While trying to read row data of the ADG, the automation name of QTP shows like,
"lblData | someGroup |  | ** |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | lblData"
The screenshot of Object Spy while spying ADG is also attached.
Other than the Automation Index, we are not able to populate any automation values of a row data.
The ADG is a custom one. Our development team has customized it in some way, and we dont have access to the code. They are using an External renderer or Custom renderer to render values into the column.
As there is no possiblity for value-based recording, we tried to access the ADG with index-based recording. Then, we 're able to perform operations like Click, but cannot read contents of the row/cell.
We're using:
HP Quick TestProfessional v10.0
Flex plugin 4.5
Internet Explorer 7
Flash Player v10
Our Questions are:
How to get automation values for these custom ADG?
Is there any other possible ways to access the custom ADG components other than these automation values?
Do we need any patches/plugin upgradation to perform this?
Is there any other tools in market that can recognize and access these custom ADGs?
Without these automation values we're unable to proceed further work. Any replies/comments/help are welcome.
Thank you!

Answer 1

A sortCompareFunction would look something like:
Function sortWithNullAtEnd(a:Object, b:Object, field:Array = null):int
    if (a.fieldName == null && b.fieldName == null) return 0;
    if (a.fieldName == null) return 1;
    if (b.fieldName == null) return –1;
    if (a.fieldName < b.fieldName)
        return –1;
    if (a.fieldName > b.fieldName)
        return 1;
    return 0;
Note that this sort would be unstable so you might be better off using a second field to get stability.