No! If I where forced to choose I would say "lower" and "higher" are enough, because "lower equal" includes always equals and this is already existing (as said you can rebuilt "lower equal" with two inserters in a row, but the other way (make lower equal to lower) is much more complicated, because f. lacks the "not equal").
Hm. I think I have a better idea.
Firsr add a row of buttons under the slider for the logic like so:
"-4", "-3", "-2", "-1", "0" (default), "+1" , "+2", "+3", "+4". Thats enough.
The number from the slider and the number from the buttons are added (don't forget to show the resulting number
Because we have always integer numbers, this works fine and it is common practice in programming to add/subtract 1 for such problems instead of dealing with operators, because this will complicate the algorithm.
And when we are here: The "equal" makes not so much sense to me. The problem is for example like this: you have a production-line. You switch the inserter which outputs from the factory off, when you reach for example 10 items. But till the items comes to you, it takes time. In this time the next item is produced (because the count wasn't reached yet). Now the item is inserted. But before the output stops, the factory has created another item and the programmed inserter puts it on the belt. Now the output is stopped. But one item lays on the belt and now it is inserted into the chest and counted. Now the production restarts, cause now you have 11 items in the box, which is not equal 10.
I barely can think of situations, where you really need "equal" - and only if it is guaranteed, that if I insert with 4 smart inserters into a chest, another smart inserter will move once, if the count is exactly reached. (this takes with 4 inserters only 0.1 secs)
So in conclusion: I really mean only "lower" and "higher" is needed. Instead of the symbol display it in English language please.
[Oh yes, when doing this plz change the numbers in the slider: Instead of 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 50 ...
to 0 4 8 12 16 24 32 64 ... this fits much better to the stack sizes - more logically I think and it avoids wasting half stacks.
Below this you can might write how many items of this type (if already selected) will fill a small chest, a smart chest... completely.
And when I'm in the middle of recommended changes
: I think it is so hard to program the inserters!
Because you have situations, where you need to program dozens with the same program. One little mistake with the slider and you can search very long for the reason why it doesn't work as expected. Takes time. Slows down gamespeed. This is not good.
I would prefer instead a controller which I program once and which can also have more than one output. And that the smart inserters work with it the same way as the slow, because the speed of the different inserters are sometimes very important but you cannot make the smart inserter slower...
Nebulous. Far target...
I try to explain this vision as clear as I can.
Step 1: Pull the filter and logic out of the inserters. They are not practical for more than 3 inserters with the same program. The inserters in my eyes are just different speed and costs resources like now. Instead, they have up to 2 stacks: One for up to 5 filter modules and one for up to 2 logic modules. This stacks rebuilts the current behaviors. This enables upgrading without making the maps unplayable.
To make the handling easier: Add a button "Add", which builds and extends the module in one step.
(and it should be easy to make a different filter module "inverse filter" which moves all, what is NOT selected) or a filter, which filters only every second/third... item)
Step 2: create a "controller-device", which has a stack for logic modules and you have some kind of routing input (-channels) to modules and then to the output (-channels).
Step 3: Remove the need for red and green wires. They are already there but normally you need only one type. It has channels to distinct the source and targets. (The red and green wires may be used inside the controller?)
Now you set this controller anywhere near and the inserters don't need any logic internally (no stacked modules are needed in this case), all inserters can be controlled by a wire and telling the inserter to which channel they should "hear". You don't have to program the inserters, you program the controller instead and wire the signal to the right channels.
Step 4: Add more modules! Instead of a simple counter module (it counts, if something is over or under a value) you have a time-switch-module. A boolean-logic module. Add sensors for power control or creeper alarm module (can be stacked only in the radar). Or a regulator circuit with 2 inputs and 5 outputs to regulate something. https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... 6234#p6234
Step 5: Now you need only some panels (for controlling the controller from everywhere) and lamps with different colors, horns, sirens, blinken lights, etc.
And this matches so well to the steam-punk theme...