It's like writing fn square(numberToBeSquared : number): number { return numberToBeSquared * numberToBeSquared; } The one letter variable versio

It's like writing fn square(numberToBeSquared : number): number { return numberToBeSquared * numberToBeSquared; } The one letter variable version of the function is perfectly readable. Most generics aren't used in a significantly complicated way. Sure, maybe if you're doing something like Haskell's lenses, then you should use descriptive names might be better, but how often are you writing type Lens s t a b = forall f. Functor f => (a -> f b) -> s -> f t and is type Lens source dest gettable settable = forall structure. Functor structure => (gettable -> structure settable) -> source -> structure dest really any easier to read?