Alex Jones

This being superseded is a somewhat new phenomenon, and has kind of crept up on us. I still think that the tools here have some merit, but I think that...

As for point 1, the operators defined here have locally acting stencils, and as such can be composed to multi dimensional GPU convolutions leveraging `NNLib` - That is the key...

There is already a `DiffEqScaledOperator` in [composite_operators.jl](https://github.com/JuliaDiffEq/DiffEqOperators.jl/blob/master/src/composite_operators.jl), and a `DiffEqIdentity` and `DiffEqScalar` found in [DiffEqBase/src/operators/basic_operators.jl](https://github.com/JuliaDiffEq/DiffEqBase.jl/blob/master/src/operators/basic_operators.jl). I note that the operators there are still in need of an `Array()` method, but...

This may prove useful to ongoing work in MethodOfLines.jl as well as here. Do you have a link to the pseudocode as I can't seem to find it on arxiv?

Excellent stuff, if the error characteristics from the paper hold this represents a massive step up in accuracy. What we need to make use of this is allowing users to...

Are we sure that they are completely obselete? I'd prefer to leave the operators up for now until we have stencil interfaces in MOL for the high point count problems...

I already have the working bruss code, let me see how to integrate this. Should I also benchmark discretization time?

I expect `WorkPrecisionSet` will need special handling for pdesol, I'm just passing the original_sol at the moment. I will duplicate all the MTKitize algs as that's the most equivalent

@ChrisRackauckas how is bruss looking now? And will unused prob kwargs be passed down to the solve, or do I need to do something special? Need to avoid wrapping.

@ChrisRackauckas it isn't deleted, it is a 4th prob and 4th `test_sol`. You may have been looking at burgers, which i have rolled back as its awaiting `SplitODESystem`.