Thank you for the excellent question. This made me reflect on my coding style and why I actually chose this.
Maybe you have noticed, my usage of LambdaCase is inconsistent: I didn't use it in the definition of foldRotation. Which happened with some refactorings (You couldn't know that, I didn't tell anywhere), but still.
After going through some 'old' code I found that I didn't start using it until early this year. (For context: I started doing Haskell in September 2024) But that may just coincide with me installing HLS.
Anyway, back to the topic: I actually think it's very elegant because it saves re-typing the function name and/or other parameters. It also easily allows me to add further arguments to the function (but only before the last one).
In my mind, this is where LambdaCase shines.
Sometimes I end up refactoring functions because it's very hard to match on multiple arguments using LambdaCase. I also try to avoid adding arguments in the back, which might bite me later and limits flexibility a lot.
Moaaar Backstory
I picked it up in some forum discussion I read where somebody argued that using explicit matches litters the Codebase with re-definitions of the same functions. It makes grep-ing the source hard.
I was easily influenced by this and adopted it.
I think this is not the way I like to go about it. I would rather use Hoogle, Haddock or HLS to search in my source.