missing initializer warnings

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 359B4A35.C1F@cs.bris.ac.uk >you write:
  > The problem I see is that both initialization by initializer list and by
  > constructor can be thought of as initialization, and I, the programmer,
  > know I'm being warned about implicit zero initialization, I might
  > therefore (reasonably?) expect to be warned about the far more dangerous
  > uninitialized member
Can't argue about the concept. However we don't have that capability at
the moment.  I think the initializer warning patch is a step forward, but
it's not the end of the road.  I suspect picking up the kinds of warnings
you're talking about is impossible in the general cases.  But maybe we can
do something ot pick them up most of the time.

I'm willing to accept additional docs about the cases this patch will and
will not detect.

jeff