>>12214453>What's the best textbook you've ever read?for LA, there can be only one
>>12214731>>12214755i think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. LADR is really cleanly written (both figuratively and literally, the formatting/typesetting/color-coding are nice) and has some cool proofs where he emphasises working with maps, not matrices, but he avoids determinants almost pathologically, to the point where the exposition on eigen-topics is kinda contrived (like reaching for your left ear with your right hand over your head). H&K on the other hand has god-tier exposition, everything is done in the most elegant way possible. their chapter on determinants is one of my favourite bits of math literature, everything just clicked for me when i read it
>>12215159if you have 0 prior math knowledge, go for Strang. if you come from an engineering or similar background, go for Axler, pic related if you're *really* prepared to dedicate yourself. technically speaking, neither book has any prerequisites aside from some mental maturity and familiarity with basics like sets & logic, but H&K is significantly harder than Axler
