Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings

Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 14:03, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Alex Hunsaker <badalex@gmail.com> writes:
> >> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 13:42, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > I stand by the position that it's way too late in the cycle for
> > insufficiently-thought-out proposals for major behavioral changes.
> 
> After skimming the thread Bruce linked:
>  http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-04/msg00512.php
> 
> It certainly seems "insufficiently-thought-out".  :(

Is this still true?  When we changed plpgsql so it shared the scanner
with the backend scanner, does this issue no longer apply, i.e. 
consider honoring standard_conforming_strings in PL/pgSQL function
bodies?
--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +