--------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE: SOLUTION AT END OF THREAD
(February 11, 2005 11:24 AM)
--------------------------------------------------------
Has anyone heard of this one? Fexes run from file utilities, but won't run deferred with the following message:
0 ERROR AT OR NEAR LINE 6 IN PROCEDURE THISFEX FOCEXEC *
(FOC36249) RECURSIVE -INCLUDE OVERFLOW DETECTED
No processing messages are displayed before this message when the deferred job terminates.
It seems to happen even with the simplest fexes.
Thanks in advance.
JSouth

Help for FOC36249 says:

(FOC36249) RECURSIVE -INCLUDE OVERFLOW DETECTED
The -INCLUDE dialogue manager directive may not include the same file recursively more than a limited number of times (either directly or indirectly).

Let me speculate:

I believe this msg really means that the depth of nesting of -INCLUDE statements has been exceeded, regardless of whether recursiveness is involved or not.

The nesting level limit used to be 4 (with recursive -includes supported, provided they are self-limiting), but has been raised in recent Focus and WF releases (7.x, 5.x) to an unspecified but much higher number.

With the (unspecified) present high limit, the most likely source of violation of the high limit would be recursiveness gone wild, hence they renumbered and reworded the message.

So: Perhaps deferred processing (read: RCaster) has not caught up, and still has 4 levels as the limit (among other unimplemented Focus features).

That would explain the difference in behavior, and the close-but-not-quite-appropriate nature of the error message.

Thanks for replying Jack. You'd think it would have something to do with includes, but here is the simple fex I've been working with to try to figure this out.
-TYPE "NORTHNONE WAS HERE"
-RUN
This two-line fex is called 'TYPOUT'
Here is Custom Report setup.
-* Edit Tool
-MRNOEDIT BEGIN
-INCLUDE TYPOUT
-MRNOEDIT END
-RUN

The deferred report was the same name as the fex it was including, hence the recursive error. Renamed the fex to another name and all was well.
Hope this helps someone else, because it was a bear to figure out.