[anon_tor_12345]

i'm gonna get downvoted for elitism but it's very clearly "aspirational upvotes" from people that don't actually know any ML and won't ever end up learning any. to wit: no one that actually studies seriously spends this much time wringing their hands over which reference to use.

you don't keep cycling through references that seem better because that's a sure way to never make any progress - you pick a reference and grind through it. maybe with occasional double checking against some other reference sure but you never end up ditching the first one because the cost of changing notations/formalisms/etc is very very high and not worth paying almost ever (since intrinsically they're all talking about the same thing anyway). this is the reason that profs today still teach from the books they learned from 30 years ago.