reverted the looping vs switch statement. I don't know what I was thinking

in doing this in the first place.  (1 conditional vs 1 per loop duh)
Thanks for calling me on this Alexander.

(I didn't actually benchmark it to see but its pretty obvious which is less
work for the computer.)

Kent

1 files changed, 10 insertions, 6 deletions

diff --git a/source/blender/imbuf/intern/jpeg.c b/source/blender/imbuf/intern/jpeg.c
index 906e69f0a28..cd90adda27a 100644
--- a/source/blender/imbuf/intern/jpeg.c
+++ b/source/blender/imbuf/intern/jpeg.c
@@ -286,21 +286,25 @@ static ImBuf * ibJpegImageFromCinfo(struct jpeg_decompress_struct * cinfo, int f
 				}
 				buffer = row_pointer[0];
 				
-				for (x=ibuf->x; x >0; x--) {
-					switch(depth) {
-						case 1:
+				switch(depth) {
+					case 1:
+						for (x=ibuf->x; x >0; x--) {
 							rect[3] = 255;
 							rect[0] = rect[1] = rect[2] = *buffer++;
 							rect += 4;
+						}
 							break;
-						case 3:
+					case 3:
+						for (x=ibuf->x; x >0; x--) {
 							rect[3] = 255;
 							rect[0] = *buffer++;
 							rect[1] = *buffer++;
 							rect[2] = *buffer++;
 							rect += 4;
+						}
 							break;
-						case 4:
+					case 4:
+						for (x=ibuf->x; x >0; x--) {
 							r = *buffer++;
 							g = *buffer++;
 							b = *buffer++;
@@ -328,7 +332,7 @@ static ImBuf * ibJpegImageFromCinfo(struct jpeg_decompress_struct * cinfo, int f
 							rect[1] = g;
 							rect[0] = r;
 							rect += 4;
-					}
+						}
 				}
 			}
 			jpeg_finish_decompress(cinfo);