[FIX] Close gaps in routing support of ComponentAnalyzer

lib/lbt/analyzer/ComponentAnalyzer.js

@@ -33,6 +33,13 @@ function each(obj, fn) {
 	}
 }
 
+function makeArray(value) {
+	if ( Array.isArray(value) ) {
+		return value;
+	}
+	return value == null ? [] : [value];
+}
+
 /**
  * Analyzes the manifest for a Component.js to find more dependencies.
  * @since 1.47.0
@@ -142,15 +149,19 @@ class ComponentAnalyzer {
 	 * @private
 	 */
 	_visitRoute( route, routing, info ) {
-		const viewPath = routing.config.viewPath ? routing.config.viewPath + "." : "";
-		const viewType = routing.config.viewType.toLowerCase();
-		const target = routing.targets[route.target];
-		if ( target && target.viewName ) {
-			const module = ModuleName.fromUI5LegacyName(viewPath + target.viewName, ".view." + viewType);
-			log.verbose("converting route to view dependency ", module);
-			// TODO make this a conditional dependency, depending on the pattern?
-			info.addDependency(module);
-		}
+		makeArray(route.target).forEach((targetRef) => {
+			const target = routing.targets[targetRef];
+			if ( target && target.viewName ) {
+				// merge target config with default config
+				const config = Object.assign({}, routing.config, target);
+				const module = ModuleName.fromUI5LegacyName(
+					(config.viewPath ? config.viewPath + "." : "") +
+					config.viewName, ".view." + config.viewType.toLowerCase() );
+				log.verbose("converting routing target '%s' to view dependency '%s'", targetRef, module);
+				// TODO make this a conditional dependency, depending on the pattern?
+				info.addDependency(module);
+			}
+		});
 	}
 }
 

test/lib/lbt/analyzer/ComponentAnalyzer.js

@@ -84,3 +84,91 @@ test("routing with routes as object", (t) => {
 	const subject = new ComponentAnalyzer(mockPool);
 	return subject.analyze({name: "test/Component.js"}, mockInfo);
 });
+
+test("routing with route with multiple targets", (t) => {
+	const mockManifest = {
+		"sap.ui5": {
+			routing: {
+				config: {
+					viewPath: "test.view",
+					viewType: "XML"
+				},
+				routes: {
+					test: {
+						target: ["test1", "test2"]
+					}
+				},
+				targets: {
+					test1: {viewName: "Master"},
+					test2: {viewName: "Detail"}
+				}
+			}
+		}
+	};
+
+	const mockPool = createMockPool("test/", mockManifest);
+
+	const mockInfo = {
+		deps: [],
+		addDependency(name) {
+			this.deps.push(name);
+		}
+	};
+
+	const subject = new ComponentAnalyzer(mockPool);
+	return subject.analyze({name: "test/Component.js"}, mockInfo).then( () => {
+		t.deepEqual(mockInfo.deps, [
+			"test/view/Master.view.xml",
+			"test/view/Detail.view.xml"
+		], "dependencies should be correct");
+	});
+});
+
+test("routing with targets with local config", (t) => {
+	const mockManifest = {
+		"sap.ui5": {
+			routing: {
+				config: {
+					viewPath: "test.view",
+					viewType: "XML"
+				},
+				routes: {
+					test1: {
+						target: "test1"
+					},
+					test2: {
+						target: "test2"
+					}
+				},
+				targets: {
+					test1: {
+						viewName: "Master",
+						viewType: "JS"
+					},
+					test2: {
+						viewName: "Detail",
+						viewPath: "test.subview"
+					}
+				}
+			}
+		}
+	};
+
+	const mockPool = createMockPool("test/", mockManifest);
+
+	const mockInfo = {
+		deps: [],
+		addDependency(name) {
+			this.deps.push(name);
+		}
+	};
+
+	const subject = new ComponentAnalyzer(mockPool);
+	return subject.analyze({name: "test/Component.js"}, mockInfo).then( () => {
+		t.deepEqual(mockInfo.deps, [
+			"test/view/Master.view.js",
+			"test/subview/Detail.view.xml"
+		], "dependencies should be correct");
+	});
+});
+