Is it common to use the same name for the data type and value constructor in Haskell?

Question

Looking at the following code:

data Point = Point Float Float deriving (Show)  
data Shape = Circle Point Float | Rectangle Point Point deriving (Show)  

which is from the book Learn you a Haskell for Great Good, which accompanies this code example with the following text:

Notice that when defining a point, we used the same name for the data type and the value constructor. This has no special meaning, although it's common to use the same name as the type if there's only one value constructor.

Now my assumption is that data Point = ... is the data type, and ... = Point Float... is the value constructor.

My question is: Is it common to use the same name for the data type and value constructor in Haskell?

Answer 1

From my limited experience: Yes. It makes sense, too. Why would you call Point differently here? It perfectly describes the data type and is also clear to use for pattern matching like this

myFunc :: Point -> Bool
myFunc (Point 0 0) = True
myFunc _ = False

It is unambiguous since you can only put the data type in the type signature of the function.

Answer 2

This is not a direct answer, but a tip for people with the same question.

Syntax highlighting may help with the distinction between the two. For example a screenshot of some of the code mentioned before, from Visual Studio Code with a Haskell Syntax Highlighting extension (with customized color coding):

Not everybody seems to agree with the accepted answer, by the way. See for example this short post, as well as this r/haskell discussion about it.