See the spec here:
https://microsoft.github.io/debug-adapter-protocol/specification#Requests_Initialize
closes: #1

request_seq fix:
https://microsoft.github.io/debug-adapter-protocol/specification#Base_Protocol_Response

Hello, thank you for your PR! I'm a little swamped right now, but I will get back to you this weekend!

I appreciate the initiatives, but please break this up into separate PRs, there are lots of different proposals here. To name a few:

• e37126d and d4182fd I'm happy to merge these
• 6a55b8f Happy to merge, but there should be a feature flag that enables implementation-specific fields
• c19ce67 There has to be a middle-ground between supporting a specific implementation and the actual spec. If nothing else, a feature flag should toggle this
• 6dc1505 If you can demonstrate a tangible performance benefit for async, I'm open to the idea but I wrote this with blocking code for a reason. For the I/O that a DAP server has to perform it is very likely that async provides no benefit, at the expense of more complicated usage and more difficult debugging.

Also, please use the rustfmt.toml config that is in the repo and try to follow the established commit message format (module: foo bar) where appropriate.

Yes, sure, I was not aware that the PR is updated for each commit I am doing on my branch ...