feat: add support for Virtual Switch (UIID 264) and Virtual Button (UIID 265)

[bwp91]

This PR adds support for eWeLink's new Virtual Switch and Virtual Button devices.

Changes

• Add UIID 265 to switchSingle array for Virtual Button support
• Add UIID 264 to switchMulti array for Virtual Switch support

These devices will use the existing single and multi-channel switch handlers respectively.

Closes #666

Generated with Claude Code

[claude]

Code Review

Thank you for adding support for eWeLink Virtual Switch (UIID 264) and Virtual Button (UIID 265) devices! I have reviewed the changes and here is my feedback:

✅ Strengths

• Clean implementation: The changes follow the existing pattern by simply adding the new UIIDs to the appropriate arrays
• Correct placement: UIID 265 is appropriately placed in switchSingle and UIID 264 in switchMulti
• Minimal changes: The implementation reuses existing switch handlers, avoiding code duplication
• Maintains order: The UIIDs are inserted in numerical order within their respective arrays

🎯 Code Quality & Best Practices

The implementation is consistent with the codebase existing patterns. The device routing logic in platform.js will automatically handle these new UIIDs using the existing single and multi-channel switch handlers.

🔍 Potential Considerations

1. Documentation: Consider adding a comment in the code noting these are virtual devices, similar to how other special device types are documented (e.g., lines 23-28 in switch-single.js document various UIID capabilities)

2. Device Behavior: Virtual devices might have different behavior compared to physical switches:

   • Do they support power monitoring?
   • Do they have any unique parameters or limitations?
   • Are there any special initialization requirements?

3. Testing Coverage: Since there is no test suite, ensure manual testing covers:

   • Device discovery and initialization
   • State synchronization (cloud/local/WebSocket)
   • HomeKit integration and responsiveness
   • Multi-channel behavior for UIID 264

✔️ Security & Performance

• No security concerns identified - the changes only add device type identifiers
• No performance impact - the arrays are used for simple inclusion checks
• No new dependencies or external calls introduced

📋 Recommendations

1. Consider adding inline comments to document that these are virtual devices
2. Verify that the existing switch handlers fully support any unique virtual device capabilities
3. Update any user-facing documentation to mention support for these new device types

✅ Overall Assessment

The implementation is solid and follows established patterns. The changes are minimal, focused, and should integrate seamlessly with the existing codebase.

Approved - Ready to merge once the virtual devices have been tested with the Homebridge plugin.

---

Closes #666