Information provided by the grader - thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've decided to grade each problem out of 4 points,
for a total of 24 points per assignment.

HW1.
In general a number of people wrote statements as if they were obvious
when they weren't.  It's important to make clear why and how you are doing
something.  A good measure for how well-written an argument is if anyone
else in the class can read what you wrote and understand it.

Specifics: In Exercise 21 of 1.1, a number of people knew what the
argument was, but didn't explain why the claims they were making were
true.  For example, given c in C there is a b in B so that g(b)=c.  How do
you know this is true? Because g is surjective, but you need to say that. 
It may seem like a minor point, but once you get into the habit of leaving
stuff out it makes arguments hard to follow.

This problem was particularly bad in Exercise 6 of 1.3, where plenty of
people found good sets, and even wrote down a bijective function, but then
never explained why the function they wrote was in fact a bijection.

HW6.
A number of students had trouble with the first problem: 4.1 #10b.  It
seems like a number of students don't fully understand the definition of
limit, or if they do they can't apply it properly.  The key thing to keep
in mind is that the choice of delta is based on epsilon.  Basically, the
bound given by epsilon on the function has to be matched by the bound
delta for the variable.  Look at figure 4.1.1 and the examples in 4.1.7,
especially the ones where they need to take an inf for delta; there's a
reason they have to take a minimum.

HW7.
Also, for what it is worth, a lot of students had trouble with problem C1
from HW7.