renaming getter function in createSignal

[Ashutosh94g]

As we know that when we create a signal in Solidjs we get a getter and a setter function but the naming convention of the getter is value in the docs. for example
const [state, setState] = createSignal(false);
here due to some react vibe we name getter as a value which is accurate for react js but in our case, it should be more like
const [getState, setState] = createSignal(false);
This will directly indicate two things that are a getter function, not a value, and avoid a lot of confusion

[Exelord]

Fully support that! That naming caused many misunderstanding in for new adopters.

[petercockerell-brt]

I think naming is entirely down to what makes you comfortable. I've just stored the result from createSignal() directly (un-destructured) on occasion, and accessed the getter setter via s[0] and s[1]. I don't think Solid cares! I think the only downside to your proposal is more typing 😀