base class access specifier[s]

[BCS]

Reply to Ellery,

> I don't buy that. Not that I'm a C guru or anything, but it looks to
> me that Parser::BaseClasses could be easily edited to make the point
> in question go away.
> 

it's not a parser thing but a grammar thing. It would be complex to define 
a grammar that allows one each of the different types of prefixes that are 
allowed:

int a = 5;
auto b = 5;
const c = 5;
static d = 5;
const static int e = 5;
protected const static int f = 5;
static const protected g = 5;

each of those is allow and reasonable in different contexts. To avoid redundant 
grammars and inconsistencies they are generalized and also shared with classes, 
structs, etc.