Appetite for syntactic sugar to match result set columns to UDT fields?

On Thursday, September 4, 2025, Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:

> *The Solution*
>
> Some syntax like:
>
> SELECT CAST((F1=> value1, F2 => value2) AS FOO BY NAME)
>
> or
>
> SELECT FOO(F1 => VALUE1, F2=> value2);
>
> or some other well-defined and non-conflicting syntax.
>

Don’t really see the point of new syntax here - both things you wrote are
already effectively syntactically valid if a user-defined function exists;
and it’s a cleaner interface. Plus, the serialized form of a composite
doesn’t include field names so giving those names special treatment
elsewhere feels excessive.

Expanding cast with custom features seems particularly undesirable.

David J.