Normative: rename deref to get

[littledan]

Suggestion from Kenneth Christiansen
w3ctag/design-reviews#321 (comment)

[ljharb]

This is a much better name imo

[erights]

Reject this PR. We started with get and renamed to deref on purpose.

Attn @dtribble

[littledan]

@erights I missed this discussion. What was the rationale?

[syg]

I don't recall the original discussion, but I also dislike "get". I think it's too general a term for a very specific concept that'll come up often in discussion, both written and spoken. Imagine a hypothetical convo of explaining WeakRef semantics to someone unfamiliar:

Alice: A gotten WeakRef is guaranteed to live for the turn of the event loop.
Bob: Gotten from where?
Alice: I mean a WeakRef that had "get" called on it.

[littledan]

cc @kenchris

[littledan]

OK, given the hesitation here from @erights, @gsathya and @syg, let's conclude that we're not making this name change.