Is it acceptable to not parse unittest blocks when unittests are disabled ?

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 3/31/2017 6:33 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> There are certainly advantages to having the compiler skip over code where
> it can, but it's pretty weird for the language to require that something be
> valid and then have the compiler ignore it. That makes it really easy to
> have something compile on one compiler but not another. Granted, properly
> unit testing and testing code on a variety of platforms (so that all of the
> version blocks and static if branches are tested) should catch those issues
> regardless, but it does seem a bit off to me for the language to require
> something and for the compiler to not care - especially the reference
> compiler.

I know. But it is worth it. It should enable D compilers to scale to handling 
very large imports.