Format/typo check 1989/westley/README.md

This one might not yet be done but there were some formatting and some
typo fixes.

1989/westley/README.md

@@ -78,18 +78,18 @@ There is a secret way to get ONE of the versions to print out
 ## Author's remarks:
 
 This is a filter.  If it is run with no arguments, it copies
-stdin to stdout.  With one argument, it ROT13's stdin to
+`stdin` to `stdout`.  With one argument, it ROT13's `stdin` to
-stdout.  With two arguments, it reverses stdin to stdout.  With
+`stdout`.  With two arguments, it reverses `stdin` to `stdout`.  With
 three arguments, it does both.  It requires the ASCII character
-set, with all characters being in 0..255, and EOF must be -1.
+set, with all characters being in `0..255`, and `EOF` must be `-1`.
 Also requires two's complement (I think).
 
 The source code will run if ROT13'ed and/or reversed, using a
 different algorithm for each version (hereafter referred to as
-`ver0` (original), `ver1` (ROT13), `ver2` (reversed), and `ver3`\
+`ver0` (original), `ver1` (ROT13), `ver2` (reversed), and `ver3`
 (ROT13 and reversed)).
 
-When compiling these versions, one needs to define 'trgpune'
+When compiling these versions, one needs to define `trgpune`
 in the compile line (which the Makefile now has).  Example:
 
 ```sh
@@ -106,13 +106,13 @@ definition will supersede the library function.  Hence, the
 compiler option gives me `putchar()`, and allows me to use
 `getchar()`.  I pass a dummy argument to `getchar()` to eliminate
 "variable number of args" from lint (unless it checks against
-the library).  Otherwise, all versions lint reasonably (main
+the library).  Otherwise, all versions of lint complain that `main()`
-returns random value & constant in conditional context [when I
+returns random value & constant in conditional context (when I
-check for ROT13 version] is all it complains about).
+check for ROT13 version).
 
 `ver0` and `ver1` use a range check and a calculation to do ROT13,
 while `ver2` and `ver3` use table lookup.  All versions contain
-`main()` and its ROT13 function, `znva()`.  `ver0`/`ver1` [`ver2`/`ver3`] are
+`main()` and its ROT13 function, `znva()`.  `ver0`/`ver1` (`ver2`/`ver3`) are
 (of course) syntactically identical, since the syntax is in the
 non-alphabetic characters.  However, since one program starts
 at `main()` while it's ROT13 counterpart starts at `znva()`, `znva()`
@@ -121,14 +121,14 @@ calls main (`znva()` is also used for output).
 All versions use recursion to work.  If the program is NOT
 reversing it's output, it prints out the (possibly ROT13'd)
 character before recursing, otherwise it prints it out
-afterward (or doesn't recurse at all when EOF is reached).
+afterward (or doesn't recurse at all when `EOF` is reached).
 Since most of this code is identical, it is put into `znva()` and
 called with a first parameter of 0 as a flag (as `main()`, it's
 first argument (argc) must be at least one).
 
-I can't use any flow control.  If I used if(), I would have a
+I can't use any flow control.  If I used `if()`, I would have a
-function vs() to define in the ROT13 version.  But a function
+function `vs()` to define in the ROT13 version.  But a function
-called vs() turns into a function called if() in the original,
+called `vs()` turns into a function called `if()` in the original,
 so it can't be done.  Therefore, I do:
 
 ```c
@@ -184,9 +184,9 @@ The code can therefore be interlaced.  There are eight
 such palindromic bits.  You can find them within the
 `/*//**/   /**//*/` pairs.
 
-The body of the code of `ver0` and `ver1` is a large lumpy 'K' (for
+The body of the code of `ver0` and `ver1` is a large lumpy `K` (for
 Kernighan); the code of `ver2` and `ver3` is a flat-topped and
-lumpier 'R' (for Ritchie).  Judicious use of spaces and tabs
+lumpier `R` (for Ritchie).  Judicious use of spaces and tabs
 helped here.  It barely fits on an 80x24 screen.  Squint.  Note
 that the code must start with a blank line, or the reversed version
 will lack a terminating newline.