Shaheed Haque wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> 
> Another smallpoint to resolve is around the logic for the support of the
> second declaration in SIP files, e.g. the bit in [] brackets here:

> I suggest that for consistency the second set of parameters should also be
> an array:

That makes sense to me.

I'm not a fan of numbers in interfaces though. Can you choose alternate 
names which convey what the second set of values are for?

Thanks,

Steve.