Under Clang, why does swapping the order of declarations of prospective destructors change which destructor is invoked?

I have this code and this outputs the following:

link to the following example https://godbolt.org/z/z8Pn9GsTv

template <typename T>
struct A1 {
    A1() {
        std::cout << "construction of a1" << std::endl;
    }

    ~A1() {
        std::cout << "destruction of a1" << std::endl;
    }
    ~A1() requires (std::is_same_v<T,int>) {
        std::cout << "it is an int" << std::endl;
    }
};

int main() {
    A1 <int>a;
    
    return 0;
}

output:

construction of a1
destruction of a1

but swapping places of destructors it gives other result:

link to the code https://godbolt.org/z/vxj7dPqaj

template <typename T>
struct A1 {
    A1() {
        std::cout << "construction of a1" << std::endl;
    }

    ~A1() requires (std::is_same_v<T,int>) {
        std::cout << "it is an int" << std::endl;
    }
    ~A1() {
        std::cout << "destruction of a1" << std::endl;
    }
};

output:

construction of a1
it is an int

wondering is this a bug?

That's indeed a reported Clang bug¹, as noted by Quimby.

Note that the second snippet (the one with the the constrained destructor first) doesn't really "work" in Clang, which just ignores the second destructor².

Also note that, unlike gcc, at the moment I'm writing, Clang doesn't seem to have implemented [P0848R3] (which is about conditional trivial special member functions) yet³.

^{1) https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50570
2) See e.g.: https://godbolt.org/z/rff7qfK65
3) See the reported values of the feature test macro __cpp_concepts, e.g. here: https://godbolt.org/z/P4z3Pj5vT}