On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> That being said it seems we failed to take any magic (aka string
>> overloads) that a blessed reference might have. Ill see about
>> submitting a patch for 9.3 (9.2 just entered beta). Anyone have any
>> thoughts on if we should backpatch a fix?
>
> Right offhand I'd be +1 for making that change, but not for backpatching
> it; but I'm not a big plperl user. Would such a case have worked before
> 9.1? If it did and we broke it in 9.1, that would be a good reason to
> back-patch into 9.1. If it never worked, then it sounds like a new
> feature.
Yeah, it worked pre 9.1.