This gives the correct result but appears to be slower than the for loop I was using, I do appreciate the suggestion though.
Peter Ehlers wrote: > > Does this > > max(apply(yourArray, 3, rowSums)) > > give you what you want? > > -Peter Ehlers > > Will Carr wrote: >> Working with an NxMxO sized matrix, currently I can do this in my code: >> >> if (max(colSums(array)) >= number) >> >> But to get an equivalent result using rowSums, I have to do: >> >> for (i in 1:10) >> { >> if (max(rowSums(array[,,i])) >= number) >> } >> >> I'm running both in a much larger loop that loops millions of times, so >> speed and such is quite a big factor for me. Currently, the colSums line >> uses about 1/10th as much time as the rowSums' for loop, and the for loop >> actually took as much time as the rest of my code combined took to >> execute. >> Is there a faster way than using a for loop and rowSums? > > ______________________________________________ > R-help@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. > > -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/command-similar-to-colSums-for-rowSums-tp931394p931539.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.