Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> This is a backwards-compatibility hangover.
> But I'd not want to break it just because someone thinks the hack is
> ugly. It was ugly from day one.
I agree it shouldn't be removed -- I was just curious to see what was
using it. It's certainly ugly, though.
I'll submit a patch documenting this.
-Neil