http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58201
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- In C++ destructors don't have parameters, so the question is where the bogusly mangled name comes from. Is that coming from the implicit this argument that is somehow used again in the mangling (though that would be the class *const, wouldn't it)?
