Normal quotes

15-01.md

@@ -11,9 +11,9 @@ Chapter 15\
 After 21 years, this story still makes me wince. Oh, the humiliations I
 suffer for your enlightenment....
 
-It wasn’t until ninth grade that I had my first real girlfriend. Okay,
+It wasn't until ninth grade that I had my first real girlfriend. Okay,
 maybe I was a little socially challenged as a kid, but hey, show me a
-good programmer who wasn’t; it goes with the territory. Her name was
+good programmer who wasn't; it goes with the territory. Her name was
 Jeannie Schweigert, and she was about four feet tall, pretty enough, and
 female—and willing to go out with me, which made her approximately as
 attractive as Cheryl Tiegs, in my book.
@@ -21,13 +21,13 @@ attractive as Cheryl Tiegs, in my book.
 Jeannie and I hung out together at school, and went to basketball games
 and a few parties together, but somehow the two of us were never alone.
 Being 14, neither of us could drive, so her parents tended to end up
-chauffeuring us. That’s a next-to-ideal arrangement, I now realize,
+chauffeuring us. That's a next-to-ideal arrangement, I now realize,
 having a daughter of my own (ideal being exiling all males between the
 ages of 12 and 18 to Tasmania), but at the time, it drove me nuts. You
 see...ahem...I had never actually kissed Jeannie—or anyone, for that
 matter, unless you count maiden aunts and the like—and I was dying to.
 At the same time, I was terrified at the prospect. What if I turned out
-to be no good at it? It wasn’t as if I could go to Kisses ‘R’ Us and
+to be no good at it? It wasn't as if I could go to Kisses ‘R' Us and
 take lessons.
 
 My long-awaited opportunity finally came after a basketball game. For a
@@ -46,27 +46,27 @@ try, though, I did manage to get the hang of this kissing business, and
 eventually even went on to have a child. (Not with Jeannie, I might add;
 the mind boggles at the mess I could have made of *that* with her.) As
 it turns out, none of that stuff is particularly difficult; in fact,
-it’s kind of enjoyable, wink, wink, say no more.
+it's kind of enjoyable, wink, wink, say no more.
 
-When you’re dealing with something new, a little knowledge goes a long
+When you're dealing with something new, a little knowledge goes a long
 way. When it comes to kissing, we have to fumble along the learning
 curve on our own, but there are all sorts of resources to help speed up
 the learning process when it comes to programming. The basic mechanisms
 of programming—searches, sorts, parsing, and the like—are
 well-understood and superbly well-documented. Treat yourself to a book
-like *Algorithms,* by Robert Sedgewick (Addison Wesley), or Knuth’s *The
+like *Algorithms,* by Robert Sedgewick (Addison Wesley), or Knuth's *The
 Art of Computer Programming* series (also from Addison Wesley; and where
 was Knuth with *The Art of Kissing* when I needed him?), or practically
 anything by Jon Bentley, and when you tackle a new area, give yourself a
-head start. There’s still plenty of room for inventiveness and
+head start. There's still plenty of room for inventiveness and
 creativity on your part, but why not apply that energy on top of the
-knowledge that’s already been gained, instead of reinventing the wheel?
+knowledge that's already been gained, instead of reinventing the wheel?
 I know, reinventing the wheel is just the kind of challenge programmers
 love—but can you really afford to waste the time? And do you honestly
-think that you’re so smart that you can out-think Knuth, who’s spent a
+think that you're so smart that you can out-think Knuth, who's spent a
 lifetime at this stuff and happens to be a genius?
 
-Maybe you can—but I sure can’t. For example, consider the evolution of
+Maybe you can—but I sure can't. For example, consider the evolution of
 my understanding of linked lists.
 
 ### Linked Lists {#Heading3}
@@ -85,12 +85,12 @@ nodes; and an inability to backtrack, unless doubly-linked lists are
 used. Unfortunately, doubly linked lists need more memory, as well as
 processing time to maintain the backward links.
 
-Linked lists aren’t very good for most types of sorts. Insertion and
+Linked lists aren't very good for most types of sorts. Insertion and
 bubble sorts work fine, but more sophisticated sorts depend on efficient
-random access, which linked lists don’t provide. Likewise, you wouldn’t
+random access, which linked lists don't provide. Likewise, you wouldn't
 want to do a binary search on a linked list. On the other hand, linked
 lists are ideal for applications where nothing more than sequential
-access is needed to data that’s always sorted or nearly sorted.
+access is needed to data that's always sorted or nearly sorted.
 
 Consider a polygon fill function, for example. Polygon edges are added
 to the active edge list in x-sorted order, and tend to stay pretty
@@ -100,15 +100,15 @@ best. Moreover, linked lists are straightforward to implement, and with
 linked lists an arbitrary number of polygon edges can be handled with no
 fuss. All in all, linked lists work beautifully for filling polygons.
 For an example of the use of linked lists in polygon filling, see my
-column in the May 1991 issue of *Dr. Dobb’s Journal.* Be warned, though,
+column in the May 1991 issue of *Dr. Dobb's Journal.* Be warned, though,
 that none of the following optimizations are to be found in that column.
 
 You see, that column was my first heavy-duty use of linked lists, and
-they seemed so simple that I didn’t even open Sedgewick or Knuth. For
-hashing or Boyer-Moore searching, sure, I’d have done my homework first;
+they seemed so simple that I didn't even open Sedgewick or Knuth. For
+hashing or Boyer-Moore searching, sure, I'd have done my homework first;
 but linked lists seemed too obvious to bother. I was much more concerned
 with the polygon-related aspects of the implementation, and, in truth, I
-gave the linked list implementation not a moment’s thought before I
+gave the linked list implementation not a moment's thought before I
 began coding. Heck, I had handled *much* tougher programming problems in
 the past; surely it would be faster to figure this one out on my own
 than to look it up.
@@ -125,18 +125,18 @@ perspective, however, there are serious flaws with this model.
 
 The fundamental problem is that the model of Figure 15.1 unnecessarily
 complicates link manipulation. In order to delete a node, for example,
-you must change the preceding node’s **NextNode** pointer to point to
+you must change the preceding node's **NextNode** pointer to point to
 the following node, as shown in Listing 15.1. (Listing 15.2 is the
 header file LLIST.H, which is **\#include**d by all the linked list
 listings in this chapter.) Easy enough—unless the preceding node happens
-to be the head pointer, which doesn’t *have* a **NextNode** field,
-because it’s not a node, so Listing 15.1 won’t work. Cumbersome special
+to be the head pointer, which doesn't *have* a **NextNode** field,
+because it's not a node, so Listing 15.1 won't work. Cumbersome special
 code and extra information (a pointer to the head of the list) are
 required to handle the head-pointer case, as shown in Listing 15.3.
-(I’ll grant you that if you make the next-node pointer the first field
+(I'll grant you that if you make the next-node pointer the first field
 in the **LinkNode** structure, at offset 0, then you could successfully
 point to the head pointer and pretend it was a **LinkNode**
-structure—but that’s an ugly and potentially dangerous trick, and we’ll
+structure—but that's an ugly and potentially dangerous trick, and we'll
 see a better approach next.)
 
 ![](images/15-01.jpg)\