I would say that even the constant of integration is not important and is more of a convention than anything else. Here is a quote from Spivak's Calculus (p. 361):
Most people write $$\int\! x^3 dx = \frac{x^4}{4} + C$$ to emphasize that the primitives of $f(x) = x^4$ are precisely the functions of the form $F(x) = x^4/4 + C$ for some number $C$. Although it is possible to obtain contradictions if this point is disregarded, in practice such difficulties do not arise, and concern for this constant is merely an annoyance.
Spivak continues to write the rest of the chapter without the constant of integration.
From a pedagogical perspective I think there is an advantage to requiring the constant of integration (and possibly even multiple constants of integration) but I don't think that it is very important as long as the user understands what they are doing.
If you interpret $\int f \,dx$ as asking for every function so that the derivative is equal to $f$ then you must use the multiple constants approach. If you interpret it as asking for some function then you can leave out any constant of integration. If you interpret it as every function on some interval where the antiderivative exists then the single constant approach is sufficient.
As long as everyone understands that every antiderivative over an interval differs from any other antiderivative by a constant then the constant of integration is not essential. Similarly for antiderivatives over disjoint unions and the multiple constants of integration approach.