To be perfectly clear about the actual behavior: if A is of size (m,n,p), then 
sum(A, (1,3)) has size (1,n,1). So it's summing over dimensions 1 and 3.

--Tim

On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 03:02:09 PM Andrew Dabrowski wrote:
> OK, thanks.  I find the phrase "over the given dimensions" ambiguous -
> isn't it actually summing over the dimensions _not_ given?
> 
> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 5:46:33 PM UTC-4, John Myles White wrote:
> > sum(A, 1) works, as does sum(A, (1, )).
> > 
> > More generally, sum(A, dims::Integer...) works, as does as sum(A,
> > (dims::Integer...), ).
> > 
> >  -- John
> > 
> > On Aug 27, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Andrew Dabrowski <[email protected]
> > <javascript:>> wrote:
> > 
> > In the doc for the Standard library I see:
> > 
> > sum(*A*, *dims*)
> > 
> > Sum elements of an array over the given dimensions.
> > 
> > In exactly what form should "dims" be given?

Reply via email to