Your comment made no sense, then when I started to write a reply requesting clarification, it refreshed, and you'd added more. I feel much better now that it makes sense; and I'll watch out for the live-edit-comment in future (I do live-edit myself too).
But I'll say that naming is tricky, since programming languages are really human languages, and as such are affected by the familiarity of their specific users as much (or, at times, more) than pure logic. Highly illogical, I know.
EDIT: The present implementation of Set.equals() depends on contents; it's independent of hashCode, and there's no problem with sets of sets.
But I'll say that naming is tricky, since programming languages are really human languages, and as such are affected by the familiarity of their specific users as much (or, at times, more) than pure logic. Highly illogical, I know.
EDIT: The present implementation of Set.equals() depends on contents; it's independent of hashCode, and there's no problem with sets of sets.