Mug: A New JavaScript compiler for the JVM (opens in new tab)

However, you don't need to wrap objects for arithmetic operations. At the moment Mug can determine the result of some types of expressions. If you're adding two doubles, it doesn't wrap the numbers before adding them. If you're calling (10).toString(), then it will autobox the number just as defined in the ECMAScript spec (the [[ToObject]] operation).

Deterction currently only works where types are explicit (a number literal will always be a number, etc.) The next step is to do type analysis on local variables, which will allow loops like for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++) { ... } to be compiled without wrapping primitives at all, greatly improving speed.

If you mean 'dynamically typed', then there's no particular problem - that's mainly a function of how you implement your calling protocols. It's much easier to write a dynamic compiler, actually, since you don't need to catch type errors at compile time.

If you mean 'supports eval', as your example seems to indicate, then you'll have to include either a compiler or interpreter in the language runtime - there's really no way around that. But it's not a big deal unless you're in some kind of embedded environment, and in that case you're probably not using a language that supports 'eval' anyway.

  for (var i = 0; i < 10; i += 1)
    eval("function function_" + i + "() { print('i am ' + i); }");

  for (i = 0; i < 10; i += 1)
    this['function_' + i]();

However, `apply` is included (cf. test/regression.js line 19). So your example pseudocode could probably be written like this:

    for (var i = 1;  i <= 10;  i++) {
        var f = function() {
            print("I'm " + i.toString());
        };
        f();
    }