From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Message-Id: <200111151639.fAFGdGb03603@candle.pha.pa.us>
Subject: Re: [DOCS] Use of 'now'
In-Reply-To: <12802.1005842176@sss.pgh.pa.us> "from Tom Lane at Nov 15, 2001
	11:36:16 am"
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 11:39:16 -0500 (EST)
CC: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>,
	Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@fourpalms.org>,
	PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

> > 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?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026