stewart -> intro to proofs -> spivak -> linear alg ->

>>9145395
>Stewart and Spivak
Literally why

This board is profoundly confused when it comes to learning calculus. I feel like the thought process is:
>Elite American schools use Spivak in their honors programs, so if I use Spivak I'll be smert two.
But they don't realize that the classes in those schools that cover Spivak don't just cover Spivak, they cover a ton of topics ranging from topology to affine geometry, the problem sets and lecture notes from those classes are 10000000x more valuable than the textbook, which the students in those classes don't even do problems from.

If you know calculus already, LEARN. REAL. ANALYSIS. There's no point in reading Spivak. Ever. REEEE.

Also do Joseph Rotman's A Journey into Mathematics. It's better than any of the other Proofs 4 Dummies books out there.

>>9145429
i was gonna go with Rotman's proof book!!!
I know calc but I just wanna revisit calc just cuz
so what you're saying is that IF i insist going over Stewart, does my new plan sounds good?: stewart -> intro to proofs -> s̶p̶i̶v̶a̶k̶ ̶ -> linear alg -> multivar calc -> discrete math

>>9145395
good enough math foundation for CS major?
Yes, CS major is low math

http://courses.csail.mit.edu/6.042/spring17/mcs.pdf

Make whole exercises and exams