C++ destructors: which statement is correct about naming, return type, and overloading?

Introduction / Context:
Destructors are special member functions that finalize objects. Their syntax, naming, and constraints differ from ordinary member functions. This question asks which property correctly describes a destructor according to the C++ language rules.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• We are considering ordinary classes (no exotic extensions).
• Focus on the destructor’s spelling, return type, and overloadability.

Concept / Approach:

A destructor’s declarator uses the class name preceded by a tilde: ~ClassName(). It has no return type (not even void) and cannot take parameters. There can be only one destructor per class (no overloading), though it may be virtual, defaulted, deleted, or user-defined. Therefore, the correct statement is that a destructor has the same name as the class (with a leading ~).

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Any attempt to declare two destructors or to assign a return type will yield compilation errors, confirming uniqueness and lack of return type.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Different name — false per syntax.

Returns integer — destructors return nothing.

Can be overloaded — not allowed; only one destructor is permitted.

Common Pitfalls:

• Confusing virtual destructors (for polymorphic deletion) with “multiple destructors.” Virtuality does not imply overloading.

Final Answer:

A destructor has the same name as the class in which it is present.