On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 4:01 PM, John Peterson <jwpeterson@gmail.com> wrote:
Your second patch isn't really a great fix, since technically things
should be initialized in the constructor in the order they are
declared in the class,

You're right, of course.
but, thinking about it for a moment, this
constructor is just oddly-written in general:  there's not really any
need to call all these vector default constructors explicitly.
Probably just really old code I'm guessing...should be fine to just
delete all of those guys.

I'm OK either way - I can reorder the declarations in the class or I can remove the explicit constructor calls, whichever you folks prefer (I'm leaning towards removing them).

Anyway, all our tests seem to pass here.

Awesome, thanks.