More Unicode, factor out pprinting of labels and names
addresses the same issue in 72ed09d  applied to other occurences in the tree,
factored out the pprint code to a helper.

now supports pprinting of heterogeneous nested-nested-nested tuples with unicode strings, 
FTW.

Ok, tests pass on 2.x and 3.x. I'd appreciate some feedback.

next step is to replace all stringify, strify and variants hroughout the
tree with calls to the new helpers defined at the bottom of format.py.
 @jseabold - 2f013de removes one of your test, do you agree?
 @wesm , can you give a general thumbs up/down on this PR? 

it's getting a little big, and I'm hesitant to put in more effort unless 
it has a good chance of being merged.

thanks
 Can you describe at a high-level what you're doing, how it changes the API, workflow etc.? Or point me to where you've already done that? Would help me to think about the impact of the changes without worrying (yet) about implementation details.
 sure. 

**what's this for**
The general idea is to make pandas Unicode-friendly.

Unicode problems have been fixed many times before,but there are
still issues throughout the code base, and perhaps more importantly,
I think it's worthwhile to consolidate the previous fixes and general handling of
Unicode into a small, well-defined and documented set of functions to be used
everywhere. 

PR #1994 already picked some low-hanging fruit, mainly having to do with
isinstance(str) checks which should have been isinstance(basestring).

**This PR** focuses on consolidating the code for the general task of pprinting
objects throughout pandas.  9e45f252d9 defines two workhorse functions which
tackle the pprinting of objects, and the rest of the commits in the series modify
existing functions throughout the tree to use them and add tests to document 
previously broken behavior. the next series would get rid of the stringify*/strify
functions to use this (to-be) sanctioned  API for pprinting as well.

**These changes have a few merits:**

1) They localize (somewhat) the code which needs to do the "right" 
thing as far as Unicode is concerned. currently there's a lot of ad-hoc
fixes which have built-up to fix previous bugs, this gave rise to code 
duplication and corner-cases which are not handled properly.

2) They makes clearer the distinction between text and Unicode/str. 
the conflation of these two gives rise to most of the Unicode bugs
I've seen so far. it makes it easier to reason about py3 compat as well.
the former convention of using functions named  str\* is unfortunate
because they are ambiguous. it would be an improvement to designate
new function which emphasize the distinction between text and encoded
strings/bytes

3) **so far, nothing should break** (unless it's "plain wrong").

regarding the test removed by 65044e844ee88d98, I can see why it's useful
behavior for someone of that locale, but it means exceptions for other people.
if a default encoding is assumed, I can't see how it could be anything other 
then utf-8, but currently the default encoding scattered in the code is "None".
[chardet](http://pypi.python.org/pypi/chardet) might give universal encoding detection ( it seems
to require longish input to work, but I might be wrong ), but until that's
implemented, or 'utf-8' becomes officially the default, IMO 65044e84 just 
verifies that the wrong thing happens . (btw, I'm all for a utf-8 default encoding,
if it's done consistently, see PR #2006).

4) The new pprint functions handle more cases gracefully, so that 
pandas feels friendlier to users outside the latin-1 world, or just
people who use strange code-points in their labels.

an example of the problem:

> In [130]: repr(u'\u03bb',)
> Out[130]: "(u'\u03bb',)"

but  a user would rather see something like:

> In [130]: repr(u'\u03bb',)
> Out[130]: (λ,)

...at least on consoles that support utf-8 or some suitable encoding,
most notably ipython qtconsole/notebook.
the code in this PR does that, and relies on `print_config.encoding` 
(with improved detection burrowed from ipython) as the encoding for
things sent to the console.

some future PR might require API changes, which can be discussed then.
mainly around the question of mandatory encoding vs default encoding
vs. guessing an encoding.

there are still more things to do, if one of the commiters gives an ack on this,
I can go ahead knowing that i'm not wasting effort down this path.
 This all looks perfectly in the right direction-- as you can see I never mustered the nerve to do this cleanup myself. Carry on
 As this series is self-contained and makes no breaking changes,
I suggest that this be merged as-is, and further work will take 
place in a seperate PR.
 Good to go; merged into master
