Making conversion operators consistently named

I noticed that for converting numbers to integers and back there are the
named operators "iton" and "ntoi", but for conversions to and from PMCs the
"set" operator is used.

Should we make all conversions have their own ops (e.g., pton, ptoi, ...) or
should we push all conversions into the set operator.  I vote for implicit
conversions in the "set" operator (i.e., moving iton and ntoi into set
operations)

Thoughts,
David

• Making conversion operators consistently named by David & Lisa Jacobs
• Re: Making conversion operators consistently named by Dan Sugalski
• Re: Making conversion operators consistently named by Gregor N. Purdy
• Re: Making conversion operators consistently named by Simon Cozens