Likelihood of MS updating the XLOOKUP() function?

[datatronics505]

Hi,
How likely is it that Microsoft will, in the near future, update the XLOOKUP function to accept multiple search criteria and continue searching beyond the first match (therefore returning ranges)?
To me at least, it seems like the questions about lookups by multiple criteria and continued search beyond the first match pop up often, both here and on other online educational resources focused on MS Excel.
The XLOOKUP looks great with its clear syntax and flexibility, it would be great to see XLOOKUP taken to a new level of awesome by updating it to accept those new arguments listed above.
In case of an answer of "not likely at all" or "it's a bad idea", what would be a suggested best approach for a multi-criteria, beyond-the-first-match lookup while at the same time avoiding long-winded formulas that take quite a bit of time to build and test, or maintain when inherited from somebody else? This assuming one has MS Office 365 subscription.

 

[alansidman]

An alternative to Xlookup is to use Power Query to create a join on the field you wish to match.

 

[RoryA]

Doesn't the FILTER function already do what you describe?

 

[datatronics505]

Doesn't the FILTER function already do what you describe?

Not by itself, maybe when used with other functions. My goal is a lookup without lengthy formulas that take time to develop, test or when inherited from someone else, maintain. I love the elegant syntax of XLOOKUP and hoped its elegance could be extended.

 

[RoryA]

You want to return multiple values based on some conditions - how is that not FILTER?

 

[datatronics505]

Consider the following (it was posted as a question here on MrExcel forum and was answered by quite a lengthy formula):

SolvingProblemsFromMrExcel.xlsx
	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N	O
3	email	period 1	period 2	period 3	period 4				email	period 1	period 2	period 3	period 4
4	abc	x							abc
5	abc		x						abc2
6	abc			x
7	abc				x
8	abc2			x
9	abc2		x
Source

There's a one-to-many relationship here, I shortened the names in the "email" column to "abc" instead of "abc@email.com" and "abc2" instead of "abc2@email.com". The "email" column of the table on the right is "one" in "one-to-many" relationship. The goal is to populate the table on the right so that an "x" is written for each period where one of the two emails were used. So we have a lookup by both email name and the period in which it's used.

 

[RoryA]

Perhaps I'm missing something but I don't see how that particularly relates to your question about wanting to "update the XLOOKUP function to accept multiple search criteria and continue searching beyond the first match (therefore returning ranges)"? That appears to just be the first part, and can easily be solved any number of ways already, whether with any of the existing lookup functions or filter, or even countifs/sumproduct. Or of course, as Alan showed, with PQ if that's an option.
IMO, functions tend to become much less elegant the more functionality you try and shoehorn into them...

 

[datatronics505]

Perhaps I'm missing something but I don't see how that particularly relates to your question about wanting to "update the XLOOKUP function to accept multiple search criteria and continue searching beyond the first match (therefore returning ranges)"? That appears to just be the first part, and can easily be solved any number of ways already, whether with any of the existing lookup functions or filter, or even countifs/sumproduct. Or of course, as Alan showed, with PQ if that's an option.
IMO, functions tend to become much less elegant the more functionality you try and shoehorn into them...

Oh, so now that I brought an example from practice to even partially ilustrate my point, all of a sudden the original question becomes murky. Suddenly, the request for a particular feature becomes inadequate.
The lookup based on multiple search criteria that has the capability to return a range is a repeating theme in questions/threads posted by MS Excel users, either blatantly obvious in the name of the thread or becomes obvius after reading the description of the lookup that user is trying to construct. If that question is ever answered, the formula offered as an answer stretches over to the next county, takes an inordinate amount of time to construct and test, and consumes even more time to troubleshoot should the data involved in the calculation change (and in these current times it's almost certain that it will). I hope we can both agree that's less than barely acceptable in the third decade of the 21st century with all the advances in computing power and AI breakthroughs.
Users don't shoehorn functionality into existing functions out of malice. There's usually a need that a function appears to cover, and because of that users flock to its usage (VLOOKUP, HLOOKUP, XLOOKUP, it's in the name).

 

[RoryA]

Having a bad day?

 

[Fluff]

IMO you are not simply doing a lookup, but consolidating data, which s not the same thing.

the formula offered as an answer stretches over to the next county

No idea what formulae you have seen, but this is short and (IMO) simple

=BYCOL(FILTER($D$4:$G$9,$C$4:$C$9=K4),LAMBDA(bc,CONCAT(bc)))