Option map/map_consume vs chain_ref/chain naming inconsistency

[bblum]

map and chain_ref take the option by reference, and map_consume and chain take the option by value and unwrap it inside. We should decide whether we prefer the -consume or the -ref suffix, and standardize the stdlib to it. (I bet Either has the same problems.)

My vote is for the shorter name being consuming, and having a -ref suffix.

Nominating backwards-compatibility milestone. While not about language syntax, these functions are pervasive enough that renaming them after 1.0 would be a big hassle.

[Kimundi]

A possible naming convention for one-element containers:

• get - get a reference to the element
• take - move the element out, keeping the container intact but empty
• unwrap - move the element out, consuming the container

[catamorphism]

Accepted for backwards-compatible

[Kimundi]

related: #7887

[catamorphism]

Obsolete