Fatal error: Nesting level too deep - recursive dependency?

[Pizobbyilsobe]

I have a complex hierarchy of nested objects, with all of the child objects (stored an array of objects in the parent class) containing a property linking back to their parent: fairly simple and straightforward, with no real problems. If I do a var_dump of any object in the hierarchy, I'll get a recursive reference in the dump, exactly as I'd expect.\[code\]FIRSTGEN _children array of objects of type SECONDGEN SECONDGEN #1 _parent object of type FIRSTGEN _children array of objects of type THIRDGEN THIRDGEN #1 _parent object of type SECONDGEN THIRDGEN #2 _parent object of type SECONDGEN SECONDGEN #2 _parent object of type FIRSTGEN _children array of objects of type THIRDGEN THIRDGEN #3 _parent object of type SECONDGEN\[/code\]I've recently added some new elements to that hierarchy, and they don't follow quite the same pattern. They are stored in an array of objects in the top-level parent, but contain a property linking them back, not to their parent, but to a sibling. When I do a var_dump now, I get a "Fatal error: Nesting level too deep - recursive dependency?".\[code\]FIRSTGEN _children_1 array of objects of type SECONDGEN_1 SECONDGEN_1 #1 _parent object of type FIRSTGEN _children array of objects of type THIRDGEN THIRDGEN #1 _parent object of type SECONDGEN_1 THIRDGEN #2 _parent object of type SECONDGEN_1 SECONDGEN_1 #2 _parent object of type FIRSTGEN _children array of objects of type THIRDGEN THIRDGEN #3 _parent object of type SECONDGEN_1 _children_2 array of objects of type SECONDGEN_2 SECONDGEN_2 #1 _parent object of type SECONDGEN_1\[/code\]Everything else within the code works correctly, with the exception of that var_dump(). I've tried creating a simpler example to demonstrate the problem, so that I could provide an example when asking this question; but haven't been able to replicate it in a short test, only within my more complex code.I know that the solution is to refactor the relationship so that my _children_2 array of SECONDGEN_2 objects is held in the appropriate SECONDGEN_1 parent, making the parent relationship "correct"... I've already started doing this.However, I'm intrigued by the error, and wondered if anybody else had encountered it (and how you dealt with it yourself).