Change bold code snippets to inline code blocks

59-05.md

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ stack that tells me to come back here when the left subtree is done. If,
 after visiting a node, there are no right children to visit and nothing
 left on the stack, I'm finished. The code does this at each node—and
 that's *all* it does. That's all Listing 59.4 does, too, but people tend
-to get tangled up in pushes and pops and **while** loops when they use
+to get tangled up in pushes and pops and `while` loops when they use
 data recursion. When the implementation model changes to one with which
 they are unfamiliar, they abandon the perfectly good model they used
 before and try to rederive it in the new context by the seat of their
@@ -59,13 +59,13 @@ pants.
 #### Measure and Learn {#Heading10}
 
 How much difference does all this fuss make, anyway? Listing 59.5 is a
-sample program that builds a tree, then calls **WalkTree** () to walk it
+sample program that builds a tree, then calls `WalkTree` () to walk it
 1,000 times, and times how long this takes. Using 32-bit Visual C++ 1.10
 running on Windows NT, with default optimization selected, Listing 59.5
 reports that Listing 59.4 is about 20 percent faster than Listing 59.2
 on a 486/33, a reasonable return for a little code rearrangement,
 especially when you consider that the speedup is diluted by calling the
-**Visit()** function and by the cache miss that happens on virtually
+`Visit()` function and by the cache miss that happens on virtually
 every node access. (Listing 59.5 builds a rather unique tree, one in
 which every node has exactly two children. Different sorts of trees can
 and do produce different performance results. Always know what you're