Does this Board has a official opinion on Spivak's Calculus ?

yeah it's pleb tier

>>9056616
If you read any other book relating to calculus other than Rudin you are the biggest brainlet known to humanity

>>9056616
On one hand, this was the book which personally got me to see the beauty in math. On the other hand, with a few years of hindsight, there are some serious problems. It's really for a student which has never seen proofs before, but it's not a terribly introduction to proofs. It avoids the language of sets and topological notions, only really pushing epsilons and deltas. Even from this perspective, lots of the proofs are really bad, especially considering the intended audience. It'd be very difficult to learn how to do epsilon-delta manipulations from reading this book alone.
The book is still very enjoyable to read, and the exercises are fairly excellent. I think this book can work well in an actual class, with the instructor supplementing many points where the book is weak, but I can't recommend it for self study purposes. Analysis I by Tao is a much better alternative for the same level of background, and ultimately covers more extremely relevant material.

>>9056647
can we get a tl;dr?

>>9056649
Can work in a classroom. Bad for self study, read Analysis I by Tao instead.

>>9056647
and what background would Tao's analysis require? Basic Differential/Integral Calculus?

>>9056616
Read Calculus vol1&2 by Apostol instead.

>>9056764
Yes, from a computational perspective. Analysis 1 (and spivak's book) build Calculus from rigorous foundations, so it's good to already know what calculus is.

>>9056619
>disrespecting mathematics for memes
Stop being a fag, spivak is an excellent textbook. Aside from teaching calculus it's a great introduction to "real" (with modern standards of rigor) mathematics. Rudin is very good too, specially R&C, but I wouldn't recommend it as much as spivak to someone not accustomed to proofs

Rudin is significantly more abstract and difficult than spivak but they have large overlap. If you already have some experience in writing proofs and you are confident in your ability to do so, you might as well start with rudin since spivak does not cover enough to be a substitute for an introductory real analysis course