http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52136
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-06 13:50:40 UTC --- I think G++ is correct here. [class.protected]p1 An additional access check beyond those described earlier in Clause 11 is applied when a non-static data member or non-static member function is a protected member of its naming class (11.2)* * This additional check does not apply to other members, e.g., static data members or enumerator member constants. address::parseNext refers to the same entity as mailbox::parseNext and access to static members does not involve an object expression, so there is no need for that access to be done through an object expression of the derived type.
