I've added the count-the-files example from #1852 since it seems to be another general case; getting a count of files, as opposed to using the actual names.

SC2012.md

@@ -5,13 +5,19 @@
 ```sh
 ls -l | grep " $USER " | grep '\.txt$'
 ```
+```sh
+NUMGZ="$(ls -l *.gz | wc -l)"
+```
 
 ### Correct code:
 
 ```sh
-find . -maxdepth 1 -name '*.txt' -user "$USER"
+find . -maxdepth 1 -name '*.txt' -user "$USER"  # Using the names of the files
 ```
-
+```sh
+gz_files=(*.gz)
+numgz=${#gz_files[@]} # Sometimes, you just need a count
+````
 ### Rationale:
 
 `ls` is only intended for human consumption: it has a loose, non-standard format and may "clean up" filenames to make output easier to read.
@@ -32,7 +38,7 @@ It shows three seemingly identical filenames, and did you spot the time format c
 
 #### Just the filenames, ma'am
 
-`ls` can usually be replaced by `find` if it's just the filenames you're after. Note that if you are using `ls` to get at the contents of a directory, a straight substitution of `find` may not yield the same results as `ls`. Here is an example:
+`ls` can usually be replaced by `find` if it's just the filenames, or a count of them, that you're after. Note that if you are using `ls` to get at the contents of a directory, a straight substitution of `find` may not yield the same results as `ls`. Here is an example:
 
 ```
 $ ls -c1 .snapshot