fix: Throw coercion error for LIKE operations for nested types. (#20212)

## Which issue does this PR close?

<!--
We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and
enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases.
You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example
`Closes #123` indicates that this PR will close issue #123.
-->

- Closes #20210.

## Rationale for this change
Throw coercion error for LIKE adjacent operations. This matches DuckDB
behaviour, just makes it clearer to users that nested types are not
supported for this comparison.

Remove the list_coercion for LIKE comparisons

## Are these changes tested?
SLT tests.

Author: jonathanc-n

datafusion/expr-common/src/type_coercion/binary.rs

@@ -1793,9 +1793,10 @@ fn binary_coercion(lhs_type: &DataType, rhs_type: &DataType) -> Option<DataType>
 
 /// Coercion rules for like operations.
 /// This is a union of string coercion rules, dictionary coercion rules, and REE coercion rules
+/// Note: list_coercion is intentionally NOT included here because LIKE is a string pattern
+/// matching operation and is not supported for nested types (List, Struct, etc.)
 pub fn like_coercion(lhs_type: &DataType, rhs_type: &DataType) -> Option<DataType> {
     string_coercion(lhs_type, rhs_type)
-        .or_else(|| list_coercion(lhs_type, rhs_type))
         .or_else(|| binary_to_string_coercion(lhs_type, rhs_type))
         .or_else(|| dictionary_comparison_coercion(lhs_type, rhs_type, false))
         .or_else(|| ree_comparison_coercion(lhs_type, rhs_type, false))

datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/type_coercion.slt

@@ -254,3 +254,30 @@ DROP TABLE orders;
 ########################################
 ## Test type coercion with UNIONs end ##
 ########################################
+
+# https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/15661
+# LIKE is a string pattern matching operator and is not supported for nested types.
+
+statement ok
+CREATE TABLE t0(v0 BIGINT, v1 STRING, v2 BOOLEAN);
+
+statement ok
+INSERT INTO t0(v0, v2) VALUES (123, true);
+
+query error There isn't a common type to coerce .* in .* expression
+SELECT true FROM t0 WHERE ((REGEXP_MATCH(t0.v1, t0.v1)) NOT LIKE (REGEXP_MATCH(t0.v1, t0.v1, 'jH')));
+
+query error There isn't a common type to coerce .* in .* expression
+SELECT true FROM t0 WHERE (REGEXP_MATCH(t0.v1, t0.v1)) NOT LIKE [];
+
+query error There isn't a common type to coerce .* in .* expression
+SELECT true FROM t0 WHERE (REGEXP_MATCH(t0.v1, t0.v1)) LIKE [];
+
+query error There isn't a common type to coerce .* in .* expression
+SELECT true FROM t0 WHERE (REGEXP_MATCH(t0.v1, t0.v1)) ILIKE [];
+
+query error There isn't a common type to coerce .* in .* expression
+SELECT true FROM t0 WHERE (REGEXP_MATCH(t0.v1, t0.v1)) NOT ILIKE [];
+
+statement ok
+DROP TABLE t0;