docs(tutorial): port the ASGI tutorial

[vytas7]

Closes #1713

• Create an ASGI tutorial skeleton, start porting from https://github.com/vytas7/falcon-asgi-example
• Create a script to check that in-line snippets are in sync no longer needed
• Set up basic asgilook Travis CI gate
• Finish porting README.rst and all files
• Run asgilook tests in GitHub Actions

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1737 (7d347e3) into master (ba78a52) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##            master     #1737   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           54        54           
  Lines         5128      5128           
  Branches       823       823           
=========================================
  Hits          5128      5128           

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ba78a52...7d347e3. Read the comment docs.

[vytas7]

It's still a bit dull and repetitive, and I find things I'd like to change every time I reread it myself.
With that disclaimer in mind, the most glaring should now be addressed... Ready for review!

[CaselIT]

Looking great 🚀 .

I think we can avoid the copy-paste of code alltogheter by using the sphinx directive literalinclude that does exactly that for us.

I think we could also update the wsgi tutorial to use it.

[kgriffs]

Type hints could be nice, but it does feel like a bit larger change, and it would probably make sense to make the same improvement to the WSGI tutorial at the same time.

Has an issue been created to track this?

[vytas7]

Has an issue been created to track this?

@kgriffs not specifically for tutorials and snippets, at least not yet.

We do have a generic typing issue though: #1350

[vytas7]

Now it has been created. 🙂 ⬆️ Thanks @CaselIT !

[kgriffs]

OK, I just found a few minor things that would be good to address for our first beta. Before the second beta, there are a handful of grammatical nits that I can circle back on.

[CaselIT]

Looks good. Just a minor comment

[kgriffs]

Good improvements. Some grammatical odds and ends could be cleaned up to conform to the KGRIFFS Style Guide™ but we can circle back on those later.

[vytas7]

to conform to the KGRIFFS Style Guide™

Heh, it seems that joke stuck 🤣 (Patent pending)