Re: zsh vs. ksh coproc redirection semantics

["Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On May 6,  5:52pm, Andrew Main wrote:
> Subject: Re: zsh vs. ksh coproc redirection semantics
> Bart Schaefer wrote:
> >(Is anybody on zsh-workers reading this?  Zefram, Zoltan, Peter?)
> 
> Yes.  My current plan is to ignore the debate, and go for the full-on
> zsh solution: by default, >&p and <&p act as if p were a normal file
> descriptor referring to the appropriate pipe, as zsh does now; at the
> drop of an option, we do whatever ksh does, if it's different.

That doesn't address the issue of how to close the coproc input in the
basic zsh model.  Is "coproc exit" really going to be the approved way?