yes. the fastest "regular JS" version achievable would be via asm.js, and WebAssembly can go faster[0]. you can compare the performance of this demo's Wave Mac

yes. the fastest "regular JS" version achievable would be via asm.js, and WebAssembly can go faster[0]. you can compare the performance of this demo's Wave Machine mode against the one used on the liquidfun.js frontpage[1]: in my crude measurement just now, a `Step()` took liquidfun.js 3.9–5.52ms, whereas it took 3.6–3.7ms in liquidfun-wasm. take with a pinch of salt since I just sampled a few random frames of each experiment at random CPU temperatures. [0] https://hacks.mozilla.org/2017/03/why-webassembly-is-faster-than-asm-js/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2017/03/why-webassembly-is-faster-... [1] http://google.github.io/liquidfun/ http://google.github.io/liquidfun/