[SPARK-54776][SQL] Improved the logs message regarding lambda function with SQL UDF

[Shubhambhusate]

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Changes made:

Added new error condition in error-conditions.json:
UNSUPPORTED_FEATURE.LAMBDA_FUNCTION_WITH_SQL_UDF - A clear error message for SQL UDFs used in lambda functions.

Why are the changes needed?

Currently, when a SQL UDF is used inside a higher-order function like transform, the error message is confusing:

CREATE FUNCTION lower_udf(s STRING) RETURNS STRING RETURN lower(s);
SELECT transform(array('A', 'B'), x -> lower_udf(x));

Before (confusing error):

[MISSING_ATTRIBUTES.RESOLVED_ATTRIBUTE_MISSING_FROM_INPUT]
Resolved attribute(s) "x" missing from in operator !Project [cast(lambda x#20395 as string) AS s#20397].
SQLSTATE: XX000

This error doesn't explain why the attribute is missing or what the user should do.

After (clear error):

[UNSUPPORTED_FEATURE.LAMBDA_FUNCTION_WITH_SQL_UDF] The feature is not supported: Lambda function with SQL UDF "spark_catalog.default.lower_udf(lambda x)" in a higher order function. SQLSTATE: 0A000

This is consistent with the existing error message for Python UDFs in the same scenario (UNSUPPORTED_FEATURE.LAMBDA_FUNCTION_WITH_PYTHON_UDF).

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

Yes. Users will now see a clearer, more actionable error message when attempting to use a SQL UDF inside a higher-order function's lambda expression.

How was this patch tested?

Test 1:

Added a new test case "SQL UDF in higher-order function should fail with clear error message" in SQLFunctionSuite.scala that:
Creates a SQL UDF
Attempts to use it in a transform higher-order function
Verifies the error condition is UNSUPPORTED_FEATURE.LAMBDA_FUNCTION_WITH_SQL_UDF
Verifies the error message contains the function name and lambda x

Test 2:
Manual testing
spark.sql("CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION test_lower_udf(s STRING) RETURNS STRING RETURN lower(s)") spark.sql("SELECT transform(array('A', 'B'), x -> test_lower_udf(x))").show()

Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

No