This class is unnecessary.
Its comment indicated that it was a compile error to allocate an
instance of a class that inherits from RefCountedBaseVPTR on the stack.
This may have been true at one point, but it's not today.
Moreover you really do not want to allocate *any* refcounted object on
the stack, vptrs or not, so if we did have a way to prevent these
objects from being stack-allocated, we'd want to apply it to regular
RefCountedBase too, obviating the need for a separate RefCountedBaseVPTR
class.
It seems that the main way RefCountedBaseVPTR provides safety is by
making its subclass's destructor virtual. This may have been helpful at
one point, but these days clang will emit an error if you define a class
with virtual functions that inherits from RefCountedBase but doesn't
have a virtual destructor.
I'm not sure we even need test coverage for this anymore.
If IntrusiveRefCntPtr calls any dtor (& we should have some coverage of that, to be sure) then it'd be basically impossible for it to call the dtor in a way that wouldn't be compatible with that dtor dispatching if it was virtual. (ie: this test sort of boils down to testing virtual dispatch of virtual dtors - a feature of the compiler, not of this library)
But up to you.