Rearrange initialiser lists so we can use -Werror=reorder

[peterbarker]

-Werror=reorder enforces a rule that initalisers must appear in the same order as the members they are initialising appear in the class declaration.

Having these appear in the wrong order can lead to programmers believing one thing about the order of object construction when something else is happening.

See point 3 from: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/constructor

Initialization order

The order of member initializers in the list is irrelevant: the actual order of initialization is as follows:
1) If the constructor is for the most-derived class, virtual bases are initialized in the order in which they appear in depth-first left-to-right traversal of the base class declarations (left-to-right refers to the appearance in base-specifier lists).
2) Then, direct bases are initialized in left-to-right order as they appear in this class's base-specifier list.
3) Then, non-static data member are initialized in order of declaration in the class definition.
4) Finally, the body of the constructor is executed.

These patches are pulled out of a larger PR as they are completely no-compiler-output-change:

Board                    AP_Periph  blimp  bootloader  copter  heli  iofirmware  plane  rover  sub
CubeOrange-periph-heavy  *                                                                     
Durandal                            *      *           *       *                 *      *      *
Hitec-Airspeed           *                                                                     
KakuteH7-bdshot                     *      *           *       *                 *      *      *
MatekF405                           *      *           *       *                 *      *      *
Pixhawk1-1M-bdshot                  *                  *       *                 *      *      *
f103-QiotekPeriph        *                                                                     
f303-Universal           *                                                                     
iomcu                                                                *                         
revo-mini                           *      *           *       *                 *      *      *
skyviper-v2450                                         *                                       

[tpwrules]

I looked through all of these and nothing raises immediate concern that an initialization order was wrong.

I agree that we can remove blah() in most cases as in the member initializer list that is identical in behavior to T blah; in the class definition so long as T is a class type. If T is not, then we need to keep it.