querystring and json function names

[RiskoZoSlovenska]

Luvit 2.x's json module provides the functions stringify() and parse() as aliases to the encode() and decode() functions. Node.js's querystring module does the same (technically, the latter are aliases for the former), but Luvit's querystring function only defines stringify() and parse(). Luvit 3.0 would be a good time and place to decide what to name json's and querystring's functions - whether to provide both sets, or just one.

[RiskoZoSlovenska]

If I am to throw in my two cents, I personally prefer only having encode()/decode() - their names are similar and obvious, and the lack of aliases reduces confusion.

[truemedian]

I've started with this in ba42b05, and I agree with using encode/decode over stringify/parse as it makes the link between them more obvious

[RiskoZoSlovenska]

Keeping only encode/decode may be a challenge with the json module, unless we want to not offer an unmodified copy of dkjson like 2.x does.

[truemedian]

What happens to json depends on if we add a better json implementation in luvi itself (like cjson)