{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gonum/blas/issues/106","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gonum/blas/issues/106/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gonum/blas/issues/106/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gonum/blas/issues/106/events","html_url":"https://github.com/gonum/blas/issues/106","id":56314328,"number":106,"title":"Existence of complex blas?","user":{"login":"mathDR","id":2363269,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2363269?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR","html_url":"https://github.com/mathDR","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mathDR/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":10,"created_at":"2015-02-03T00:15:22Z","updated_at":"2015-02-03T20:47:37Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Hi, is there a plan to implement complex versions of the level 1 through 3 blas functionality?  I guess both a complex conjugate and hermition operation would need to be implemented.\r\n\r\nThoughts on this?"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gonum/blas/issues/comments/72731278","html_url":"https://github.com/gonum/blas/issues/106#issuecomment-72731278","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gonum/blas/issues/106","id":72731278,"user":{"login":"btracey","id":3680859,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/3680859?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey","html_url":"https://github.com/btracey","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/btracey/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-02-03T20:47:37Z","updated_at":"2015-02-03T20:47:37Z","body":"Right now we allocate one goroutine per GOMAXPROCS, and perform a block-based matrix multiplication. From what I've read, this block-based approach is faster than the naive algorithm even in serial. If Issue 9129 is fixed, then cache-oblivious algorithms will be supported, and at least on Dmitry's blog, this implementation is also faster in serial than the naive algorithm. At that point, I'm not sure what such a global would gain us, although I suppose we could implement a go-routined recursive and a non-goroutined recursive version. "}}