Stepping to one side of the discussion could I just point out that,
notation is not just about the form of the final program. One of the
claimed strengths and appeals of FP is the opportunity for program
transformation via a useful
repertoire of algebraic law, cf the work on Squiggol, and the numerous
functional pearls by folk including Richard Bird et.al..
This work befits from having concisely-expressed rules that open the road
to manipulation - long-winded
identifiers suitable for large libraries are not necessarily ideal for
algebraic
manipulation. Ye you could treat the two as separate entities, But a
pleasant feature of Haskell is the ability to work with the notation both
for developmemt and final program.
Going back to the original proposal, I'm not bothered, I would probably
just ignore a singleton library. However I'm -1 on philosophical grounds.
I'm used to teaching FP to undergrads and half the battle is encouraging
people to think functionally, to
make use of the underlying mathematics and computational model rather than
transliterate