Rename destroy() to dispose()

[reillyeon]

Since in many cases a resource continues to exist for a period of time while processing finishes I think it will be less confusing to developers to name these methods release().

[bbernhar]

I'm unsure how WebNN's "destroy()" meaning differs from WebGPU's "destroy()" to justify a new name. Web developers should be familiar with "destroy" meaning delayed destruction. I could see release() being specifically useful for interop to mean "expire".

[inexorabletash]

Bikeshedding: we could also use dispose()

This would align with Symbol.dispose from https://github.com/tc39/proposal-explicit-resource-management

[reillyeon]

I have to say I don't feel particularly strongly about any of destroy(), dispose() or release(). Aligning with Symbol.dispose seems like the strongest argument for any of these words.

[anssiko]

Could we address this by updating the destroy() prose a la WebGPU's? It feels like developers' cognitive load would be lowered if we stay aligned with the WebGPU's verbiage?

[reillyeon]

I agree that if most of the platform (particularly WebGPU) has chosen destroy() then we shouldn't introduce additional words even if they are technically more correct.

If there are no objections I am going to close this issue and paint the word "destroy" on the side of the bike shed.

[inexorabletash]

I don't see any objections, so I'm going to close this on @reillyeon's behalf. Please comment or re-open if more discussion is warranted.