Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>I don't think this is a good idea. If someone really relied on 'current'
>>>for his application, substituting 'now' for it is not going to make things
>>>better. If it's done silently it will definitely make things worse.
>>>
>>I hadn't thought about it, but I believe Peter is right. Rejecting
>>'current' is better than silently translating it to 'now'. We have
>>removed this feature and we shouldn't try to paper over the fact.
>>
>
>My only question is how many people were using current thinking it
>functioned as 'now'? Was current ever a desired feature?
>
The only times I have used current were by mistake when PG interpreted
something
starting with current as current. I suspect that everybody who has been
using current
thinking it functions as 'now' has either found out it does not or does
not really care ;)
-----------
Hannu