Actually jmockit uses byte code patching so you may suffer less reflection overhead than expected. My guess is that powermock is doing something quite similar.
Sent from my iPhone On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:29 AM, Jesse Yates <jesse.k.ya...@gmail.com> wrote: > Only long standing problem I've found with it is that, by necessity, almost > everything is done via reflection, so method names to (power)mock need to > be passed as strings, which can be annoying (but not hard) to maintain. > > +1 on adding in powermock as a best practice and updating the book to say > so.
