Re: Renaming some functions

[Philippe Vaucher]

>   >> >>     multibyte-string-p  =>  string-multibyte-p
>
>   > > However, based on what Richard wrote, maybe we should have both of
>   > > these functions ;-)
>
> I did not suggest that we should define both names.
> What I said was that each name goes naturally with a different
> meaning.  I think implementing either one of them is sufficient.

The current "multibyte-" prefix contains only a few functions. Maybe
it's too small to
warrant its own category?