[PATCH 1/2] appendix/questions/after: Use \qco{} for quoting code

after.tex is using ``...'' for quoting some variables of a code snippet.
Use \qco{} instead.

Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <[email protected]>
---
 appendix/questions/after.tex | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/appendix/questions/after.tex b/appendix/questions/after.tex
index c165eb0e..d6b0dfdf 100644
--- a/appendix/questions/after.tex
+++ b/appendix/questions/after.tex
@@ -13,15 +13,15 @@
 An important non-intuitive issue is that code can be delayed at
 any point for any amount of time.
 Consider a producing and a consuming thread that communicate using
-a global struct with a timestamp ``t'' and integer fields ``a'', ``b'',
-and ``c''.
+a global struct with a timestamp \qco{t} and integer fields \qco{a}, \qco{b},
+and \qco{c}.
 The producer loops recording the current time
 (in seconds since 1970 in decimal),
-then updating the values of ``a'', ``b'', and ``c'',
+then updating the values of \qco{a}, \qco{b}, and \qco{c},
 as shown in \cref{lst:app:questions:After Producer Function}.
 The consumer code loops, also recording the current time, but also
-copying the producer's timestamp along with the fields ``a'',
-``b'', and ``c'', as shown in
+copying the producer's timestamp along with the fields \qco{a},
+\qco{b}, and \qco{c}, as shown in
 \cref{lst:app:questions:After Consumer Function}.
 At the end of the run, the consumer outputs a list of anomalous recordings,
 e.g., where time has appeared to go backwards.
-- 
2.17.1