bug#59745: 26.3; Rename `string-collate-lessp' to respect the convention

[Drew Adams]

> We also have bufferp, stringp etc., so -lessp
> is not so bad,  especially since it's modeled
> on string-lessp.
> 
> And anyway, it's too late now for renaming.
> Closing.

OK, it's too late.  Understood.
___

But what you say wrt `string-lessp' doesn't
correspond to what the convention is, as it's
documented now.  `bufferp' and `stringp' _do_
respect the convention.

If what you say is to be the _new_ convention,
or a correction to how the convention should be
specified, then please consider updating the doc
to reflect that.  Currently, what we say should
be done is (sometimes) not what we do.
___

Note that `string-lessp' itself doesn't respect
the current convention.

`buffer-live-p' does respect it - it should be
the model for a name with multiple parts/words
(per the current convention).

`string-lessp' in fact illustrates what I said:

  "Every such misnaming encourages others, as
   people tend to base new names on names they
   see for existing things."

Exactly that - you're now citing `string-lessp'
as a precedent.  It's an easy, slippery slope.

It's not because there've been some unfortunate
misnamings that we should create more, based on
those as precedent.