Let and Lambda

[Bob Phillips]

If you define the table, in my mind it becomes more of a range to the LET formula

You may be right there, but if so that is poor implementation of LET in my view. As with other instances, CF, row grouping, for example, the Excel guys have added functionality without consideringfor tables, even though they are pushing tables as the way to go.

, as such you can refer to the columns with Index:

=LET(tx, tblTransactions,
          method, "Transfer",
          tx_date, TODAY(),
          res, FILTER(INDEX(tx,,1), (INDEX(tx,,2)=method)*(INDEX(tx,,1)>=tx_date)),
          res)

No, that is horrible. It is referring to columns in the table by position not by name, which is wholly at odds with the rationale of structured tables.

Other than that you would use the table name itself:

=LET(method, "Transfer",
          tx_date, TODAY(),
          res, FILTER(tblTransactions[Date], (tblTransactions[Method]=method)*(tblTransactions[Date]>=tx_date)),
          res)

That is exactly what I am doing now, but that means that I reference the table name 3 times rather than just once, not good coding practice.

If you renamed the table 'tx' then 'tx[Date]' would be fine.

No way! I have very clearly defined coding standards