Add compareJewelsOfSameType option for ItemsTab

[roychl666]

Compare only jewels of the same type when the option is set to true. Maintain existing behavior by defaulting the option to false.
This PR picks up the work started by @michelrtm in #6314. I've updated it to work with the tip of tree.

Fixes #6275.

Description of the problem being solved:

Currently, jewels (e.g., Abyss, Crimson, Cobalt, Viridian) are compared against all occupied jewel slots, including incompatible types like Cluster Jewels, which creates irrelevant data. This change introduces a toggle to ensure jewels are only compared against slots containing the same jewel type.

Steps taken to verify a working solution:

• Hover on existing jewels with the option enabled/disabled
• Hover on unused jewels with the option enabled/disabled

Link to a build that showcases this PR:

https://pobb.in/6z027yW7pPix

Before screenshot:

With option default disabled.

• Hover on existing abyss jewel

• Hover on unused abyss jewel

• Hover on existing crimson jewel

• Hover on unused viridian jewel

After screenshot:

Enable the option.

• Hover on existing abyss jewel

• Hover on unused abyss jewel

• Hover on existing crimson jewel

• Hover on unused viridian jewel

[LocalIdentity]

I feel like this PR would cause more issues than it would solve. Many people never look in the options menu for something like this and would wonder why their jewels are suddenly no longer comparing to each other.

[roychl666]

Thanks for the feedback. To clarify, the option is disabled by default, so it shouldn't change the behavior unless enabled explicitly.
When you mention this PR might cause more issues, do you think the current implementation can be improved to make things better? Or are you suggesting that the goal of #6275 is no longer valid or necessary? If it’s the former, I’m happy to iterate on the approach based on your suggestions. If it’s the latter, should we go ahead and close the original issue?

For context, I’ve been looking at issues with 'good first issues' label and found #6275 resonate with my own use case.
Is the 'good first issue' label still the best way to find entry-level tasks, or is there another area you’d recommend for a first-time contributor to help out with?