No, see below, I just think that if you write something is "easy to understand" and then you go on and explain it using unknown (to the reader) symbols without given the symbols pronounceable names, you're doing it wrong. One of the tricks that helped me most when learning more advanced math was to learn "reading"/"pronouncing" formulas first and understanding them second. It feels very nice and intuitive. That's why I'm always annoyed when people explain something using very domain-specific symbols and don't provide any way to "read" them.
I misunderstood your parent comment then I think. I prefer the Haskell tutorials (especially for beginners) that use the function and then provide the shorthand symbol to do it with.
You can also search those symbols on Hoogle[1] or if it is a builtin keyword the Haskell keywords page[2] can be useful.
