Add aiologic and culsans to Awesome Trio Libraries in the docs

[x42005e1f]

Hi, I'd like to add aiologic to your list of awesome libraries. My library can be used to communicate with both threads and event loops in those threads, which can also be seen as an alternative approach to Trio/asyncio interoperability. But I'm not sure about which category aiologic is better to be in, so I put it under "Tools and Utilities". No documentation yet, but hopefully someone will find it useful.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.63%. Comparing base (b834f73) to head (fea68b9).
Report is 167 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3092      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   99.60%   99.63%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         121      122       +1     
  Lines       17882    18380     +498     
  Branches     3214     1222    -1992     
==========================================
+ Hits        17811    18312     +501     
+ Misses         50       47       -3     
  Partials       21       21              

see 56 files with indirect coverage changes

[A5rocks]

I was looking at your README and it seems pretty nice! I don't think this is a good idea though:

Optional Trio-style checkpoints

If something is optional, that means there are no guarantees. And it's the guarantees that every await will call a checkpoint that make trio easier to use.

[x42005e1f]

I agree @A5rocks, it does look weird, but the point is there: if a Trio run loop is running in a thread, then by default every await in that thread will call a checkpoint, otherwise it won't. This behavior can be changed via environment variables: you can even enable checkpoints for synchronous calls at the threading level (and get very nice fairness). It all depends on what the user wants.

[x42005e1f]

Now, since the last commit, the above behavior is clarified in my README.

[A5rocks]

This seems fine to me, though I'm not too sure about the summary. If you think that describes it best then good enough.

[A5rocks]

This still looks good to me :P

I didn't merge this previously cause I wanted someone else to sanity check. But if nobody does I'll merge this eventually (not that soon though.)