Comment by boppo1

I often hear Rudin is too challenging to be an introduction to analysis. You need to be very comfortable with relevant proofs already. Then what's so good about it? I'm not doubting it's great because I do hear it lauded, but it's hard to imagine. It is just a collection of mathematical obscurities for super-nerds?

I've been ever-so-slowly self teaching higher maths. Right now halfway through Hammond's book of proof and almost done with Polya 1.