Why redundant? You only say twice the same thing. :)

Seriously, I hate this behavior. And, also seriously, you should consider using the IN clause in all your REPLACE statements. As you know, this "bug" bites especially when the code is maintained and somebody changes the working area and forgets to restore it. Absolutely a PITA to find it.

>I don't always use the IN clause on replace. It "feels" redundent when specifying the alias.field means of addressing what is to be replaced.