Wrong comparable parameter "bundle" is used for taxonomy_term / node ids.

I added some lines of documentation to better explain what it does. That would have already helped in the past to better understand what it's meant for. I'm at least pretty sure that assigning an ID to the "bundle" key here is wrong, also comparing that to the other lines where it's done correctly.

The hard-coded $route_match->getParameter('node')) also looks a bit risky to me, for example for other entity cases with "bundle" parameter, but that's a different story and I'm not totally sure about the consequences.

case 'bundle':
  case 'node_type':
    if (($entity = $route_match->getParameter('node')) && ($entity instanceof EntityInterface)) {
      if ($entity->bundle() === $tour_param) {
        $params['bundle'] = $entity->bundle();
      }
    }
    break;

Should maybe be checked in a separate issue.

Thanks @smustgrave - hope I got you right?

What do you think about #5 looking at the code?

@grevil sorry that was wrong, please undo and review.

Mhm yes I think that would make sense and shouldn't be too hard to add a test for :bundle against node or taxonomy term.
@grevil can you do that? Should fail without the fix, as it returns the ID instead of the bundle. Should you have any questions, contact me.

Thanks @grevil for implementing the fix and fixing the logical issue. I agree that it seems that at least that condition is never used and that might be the reason why the bug with the wrong key here has never been experienced in the past - it's just dead (wrong) code?

Still I think the switch-case is still needed to add further parameters for comparison. But as #3554749: "bundle" route parameter only supports node shows, it has several flaws. I think our job is done here and now we at least have some more useful tests and improved code :)

@smustgrave I agree but as written in #20 maybe these lines are dead code? Do you have a (real world) example for this?

At least it's untested, otherwise it would have been broken!