I am taking my first analysis course in university. Since I am studying in Germany, there is no real distinction between calculus and real analysis, meaning this is the first university course on anything analysis that can be taken here. Therefore, I am new to the concepts of mathematical proofs. However, they are regularly used in the course and I often have problems following them. Since I am taking classes on mathematical principles and logic as well, my initial idea was to buy a dedicated textbook on proofs, e.g. Hammack's Book of Proof, Velleman's How to Prove It or Chartrand's Mathematical Proofs: A Transition to Advanced Mathematics, which I could use for analysis as well as the other classes.
However, some answers to this question imply that this might not be the best way to go and I should rather buy a book on a certain mathematical field, in my case analysis, that contains a rigorous introduction to proofs in itself and applies them. Additionally, since time is limited, I am not quite sure whether it makes sense to focus on a book on mathematical proofs (which sometimes have several hundred pages) rather than the course itself.
Since I am missing an introductory text to analysis anyway, I thought about following the recommendations in the answers and getting a book that teaches introductory analysis with a focus on formal notation as well as writing and understanding mathematical proofs. From what I have read so far, Abbott's Understanding Analysis and Tao's Analysis I + II might be great options for that purpose, however, one answer on the question I was referring to earlier suggests there might be a specific book which is specifically designed that way.
Should I get a separate book on mathematical proofs or would I be better off with one of the analysis books I mentioned (or a completely different one)?