On Jan 16, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Bojan Janisch wrote:

> first thanks for your reply. You specialized the question too much. I just wanted to know if it's possible to create different syntax trees for each population because the non-based rules got other objects than the rulebased-rules.

Oh, that's easy. Yes, ECJ supports different function sets, indeed entirely different representations in different populations. It also supports different function sets in different trees within the same individual (a requirement for doing ADFs).

> I don't know what you mean with interpreter (I think you mean rule syntax or so), but I cannot use
> the rule package how it is at the moment, because I want to evolve the condition of a rule, not
> the complete rule. What I've read up to now is that only complete rules will evolve. I don't
> know if I can change the parts which should evolve and which not, of a rule of course.

This sound mistaken. If you are really talking about rules or their conditions, there's a big literature on this. My book has a small introduction to the subject but it's far from comprehensive.

Good luck Bojan.

Sean