The following causes a syntax error under Borland C++ 3.1, and I just don't
understand why:
(see comments marked with @@@@@. The first compiler message, even if it were
justified, still is an outright lie, I think. A compiler bug, or my ignorance?
I hope the latter.

============================================================================
#include <stdio.h>

class B;
template <class someB> class A
{
public:
   someB *aB;
};

class B
{
public:
   virtual int BMethod(int arg);
   void InternMethod(void);
};

int B::BMethod(int arg)
{
   printf("In BMethod, arg=%d\n", arg);
   return arg;
}
void B::InternMethod(void)
{
   BMethod(13);
}

class myB: public B
{
   public:
   int BMethod(int arg);
};
class myA: public A<class MyB>
{
};

int main (int argc, char **argv)
{
   class myA *aPA = new myA;

   // @@@@@
   // Here BorlandC++ 3.1 says:
   // "InternMethod is not a member of MyB".
   // WHY NOT? It is, isn't it?
   aPA->aB->InternMethod();

   delete aPA;

   class myB *adB = new myB;
   adB->InternMethod();       // @@@@@ but this is accepted !

   return 0;
}

int myB::BMethod(int arg)
{
   printf("In myB:BMethod, arg=%d\n", 2 * arg);
   return arg;
}