Is a float member guaranteed to be zero initialized with {} syntax? - c++

Question

In C++17, consider a case where S is a struct with a deleted default constructor and a float member, when S is initialized with empty braces, is the float member guaranteed by the standard to be zero-initialized?
struct A {
int x{};
};
struct S
{
S() = delete;
A a;
float b;
};
int main()
{
auto s = S{}; // Is s.b guaranteed to be zero?
}
In my opinion, cppreference.com is not clear, saying both that:
If the number of initializer clauses is less than the number of members and basesor initializer list is completely empty, the remaining members and bases (since C++17) are initialized by their default member initializers, if provided in the class definition, and otherwise (since C++14) copy-initialized from empty lists, in accordance with the usual list-initialization rules (which performs value-initialization for non-class types and non-aggregate classes with default constructors, and aggregate initialization for aggregates). If a member of a reference type is one of these remaining members, the program is ill-formed.
(from here), which implies that b is guaranteed to be zero
In all cases, if the empty pair of braces {} is used and T is an aggregate type, aggregate-initialization is performed instead of value-initialization.
(from here)
which implies that b is not guaranteed to be zero.
There is also a discussion that seems to imply that while not guaranteed, all known compiler zero-initialize anyway:
The standard specifies that zero-initialization is not performed when the class has a user-provided or deleted default constructor, even if that default constructor is not selected by overload resolution. All known compilers performs additional zero-initialization if a non-deleted defaulted default constructor is selected.
Related to Why does aggregate initialization not work anymore since C++20 if a constructor is explicitly defaulted or deleted?

Answer 1

This is a quirk of C++ that is fixed in C++20. In the meantime you can add explicit to the deleted default constructor to force the struct to become non-aggregate, and make your code a guaranteed compile error:
struct A {
int x{};
};
struct S
{
explicit S() = delete;
const A a;
const float b;
};
int main()
{
auto s = S{}; // error: call to deleted constructor of 'S'
}

Answer 2

Because S is an aggregate, S{} will perform aggregate initialization. The rule in the standard about how members are initialized when there are no initializers in the list is basically what you cited:
If the element has a default member initializer ([class.mem]), the element is initialized from that initializer.
Otherwise, if the element is not a reference, the element is copy-initialized from an empty initializer list ([dcl.init.list]).
So for b, that's the equivalent of float b = {};. Per the rules of list initialization, we have to get all the way down to 3.10:
Otherwise, if the initializer list has no elements, the object is value-initialized.
And value initialization will initialize a float to 0.