RE: Rethinking count-words-region

[Drew Adams]

> think that's definitely the wrong path.
> Its very important to express with command-names what they are doing.
> If we have a command returning more than one thing, this must 
> be spoken out, not done silently.

1+

No reason to gratuitously introduce confusion.  Sometimes we cannot avoid it,
and names are never perfect.  But this is counter-productive.  Please DTRT, one
way or another.

If you define a command that does multiple things, then try to find a name that
expresses that.  If the multiple things are completely different from each
other, then they might not belong together in the same command.

In this case, the command reports a certain number of counts, which is fine.
The name should reflect that.