RFC: Collections reform

This is a combined *conventions* and *library stabilization* RFC. The goal is to establish a set of naming and signature conventions for `std::collections`.

The major components of the RFC include:

* Removing most of the traits in `collections`.

* A general proposal for solving the "equiv" problem, as well as improving `MaybeOwned`.

* Patterns for overloading on by-need values and predicates.

* Initial, forwards-compatible steps toward `Iterable`.

* A coherent set of API conventions across the full variety of collections.

*A big thank-you to @Gankro, who helped collect API information and worked through an initial pass of some of the proposals here.*

[Rendered](https://github.com/aturon/rfcs/blob/collections-conventions/active/0000-collections-conventions.md)
:laughing: BS-TreeMap :joy: 

In all seriousness I'm starting to become uncertain about our current strategy here. I pushed for BinaryHeap for matching the current scheme, but maybe we want it to be a PairingHeap eventually (better for dijkstra's, certainly, probably suboptimal otherwise). AATreeMap seems too specific, for sure.

C++ stl has an interesting strategy in that they just have "unordered map" and "ordered map" for their hashmap and treemap. I think it's probably more friendly strategy for newbies? Maybe? Our naming certainly seems to be all over the place.