Hmm. Is this sbcs thing really safe at all? Just because a character
set translation gives a particular mapping for 0x00-0xff in that order
why is it guaranteed that it will for any other ordering of bytes?
e.g. invent a mapping which does "0xff <end>" -> "0xff" but "0xff 0xf1" -> "0x42". I'd be surprised if a mapping between two real charsets does *not* exist which does something like this, given the range of extremely weird and wonderful charsets out there.
to rule out this issue completely, 256 calls to iconv() would be required in check_sbcs() to test each proposed byte/char individually ;)
or maybe do two tests... one with the byte values incrementing and one with the byte values decrementing... that would seem to drastically reduce the chances
not nice either way
how else to tell that this is simple table?
