Should this only work with java.util.List implementations? java.util.Set inherits from java.util.Collection, but Ruby doesn't exhibit the same multiple assignment behaviour with Sets, presumably because there is no ordering.

@nirvdrum, what about a Queue where there is ordering but it is not a List?

We'd also miss the SortedSet interface if we went List only. I feel like we should just do it for all collections since it will still work it just wont have any guarantees about order.

Ahh, more corner cases. I guess I don't have a strong issue with it being on java.util.Collection, other than it doesn't have 1:1 parity with Ruby's Set. Since #459 seemed to be about deviating behaviour, I figured I'd mention that this breaks in a different (probably less important) way.

Good fix, I like it. Merged.