Improve detection accuracy of mb_detect_encoding

Originally, `mb_detect_encoding` essentially just checked all candidate
encodings to see which ones the input string was valid in. Howeve

Improve detection accuracy of mb_detect_encoding

Originally, `mb_detect_encoding` essentially just checked all candidate
encodings to see which ones the input string was valid in. However, it
was only able to do this for a limited few of all the text encodings
which are officially supported by mbstring.

In 3e7acf901d, I modified it so it could 'detect' any text encoding
supported by mbstring. While this is arguably an improvement, if the
only text encodings one is interested in are those which
`mb_detect_encoding` could originally handle, the old
`mb_detect_encoding` may have been preferable. Because the new one has
more possible encodings which it can guess, it also has more chances to
get the answer wrong.

This commit adjusts the detection heuristics to provide accurate
detection in a wider variety of scenarios. While the previous detection
code would frequently confuse UTF-32BE with UTF-32LE or UTF-16BE with
UTF-16LE, the adjusted code is extremely accurate in those cases.
Detection for Chinese text in Chinese encodings like GB18030 or BIG5
and for Japanese text in Japanese encodings like EUC-JP or SJIS is
greatly improved. Detection of UTF-7 is also greatly improved. An 8KB
table, with one bit for each codepoint from U+0000 up to U+FFFF, is
used to achieve this.

One significant constraint is that the heuristics are completely based
on looking at each codepoint in a string in isolation, treating some
codepoints as 'likely' and others as 'unlikely'. It might still be
possible to achieve great gains in detection accuracy by looking at
sequences of codepoints rather than individual codepoints. However,
this might require huge tables. Further, we might need a huge corpus
of text in various languages to derive those tables.

Accuracy is still dismal when trying to distinguish single-byte
encodings like ISO-8859-1, ISO-8859-2, KOI8-R, and so on. This is
because the valid bytes in these encodings are basically all the same,
and all valid bytes decode to 'likely' codepoints, so our method of
detection (which is based on rating codepoints as likely or unlikely)
cannot tell any difference between the candidates at all. It just
selects the first encoding in the provided list of candidates.

Speaking of which, if one wants to get good results from
`mb_detect_encoding`, it is important to order the list of candidate
encodings according to your prior belief of which are more likely to
be correct. When the function cannot tell any difference between two
candidates, it returns whichever appeared earlier in the array.

show more ...