Re: Bug in classno, qbfclassno?

[Igor Schein <igor@txc.com>]

On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 10:44:20AM -0600, Fernando Rodriguez-Villegas wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  Sorry if I'm out of date on this. By pure chance I found the
>  following wrong outputs of the function classno (or it's new
>  incarnation qbfclassno). I'm using version 2.0.17.
> 
>  classno(-174660)= 168 
>  classno(-272580)= 180
> 
>  Perhaps significantly in both cases the right answer is 192. 

You're right, definitely a bug:

? quadclassunit(-174660)[1]
192
? quadclassunit(-272580)[1]
192
? 

Both discriminants are fundamental.

Igor