If you're lucky enough to be using gcc's cpp preprocessor, I suggest you
take a look at its powerful "variadic macros" extensions.
Among other things, it will allow you to write elegant things like that:

#ifdef DEBUG
#define PRINTF(_X_,_ARGS_...)    printf(_X_,## _ARGS_)
#else
#define PRINTF(_X_,_ARGS_...)    do{}while(0)
#endif

/*...*/
void foo(void)
{
  ...
  PRINTF("Debug print");
  ...
}

This will both avoid breaking cc-mode's indentation scheme AND make the code
look better (IMHO).
The do{}while(0) statement does not generate warnings with gcc -Wall, I
wonder if it fools lint also.
There are other C preprocessors that also support variadic macros... (see
manual)
--
Laurent

"Ola Nilsson" <sds024five1@sydpost.nospam.nu> a écrit dans le message de
news:87oeiz16lf.fsf@helmut.nilsson.homedns.org...
> Hello,
>
> I'm working with code that contains a number of debug
> macros. Typically the look like this:
>
> #ifdef DEBUG
> #define DEB(x) x
> #else
> #define DEB(x)
> #endif
>
> These are used in the code like this:
>
> void foo(void)
> {
>   ...
>   DEB(printf("Debug print";)
>   ...
> }
>
>
> That is, in many places the semicolon is inside the macro not outside
> (that would generate empty statements that lint would complain over).
>
> Now, my problem is that cc-mode wants to indent the next line, but I
> would like to have int on the same indentation level as the DEB
> line. How can I get this behaviour? Do I need to add regexps for the
> DEB() types of macros? And in that case, where should I add them?
>
> Thanks for any help,
> -- 
> /Ola Nilsson