Thanks Brice. A better solution would be great since the PowerMock Mockito integration is very hacky and fragile (and has always been). Unfortunately I guess that I won't have the time needed to undertake such as big task atm. Perhaps this is off topic but I'm curious to know what lib Mockito will use instead of CgLib in the future?

We'd like to move to bytebuddy, and actually @raphw (the author of bytebuddy) contributed us something. I agree it's moving slower that I would like to be, but we're getting there :)

At some point we may completely remove CGLIB, maybe still offering it as a MockMaker.

Anyway mockito already offers a way to change the MockMaker. In bytebuddy, you could propose extension points, Szczepan introduced the Plugins class that may be a starting point to extend / plug in behavior.

By the way do you have an idea when you want to release this temporary fix.

I very much agree that Mockito should move on to using Byte Buddy soon. ;)

Is there any specific extension you would like to see in the library to simplify integration or are you rather speaking about Mockito's interface to the code generator? Byte Buddy gained a fair amount of users recently and as those users did not experience too many bugs, I am very much open to suggestions that extend the library's functionality if the implementation makes sense at this point in time.

As a matter of fact, Byte Buddy already offers a rebase definition which more or less flattens a defined subclass into the base class without breaking the subclass calling semantics. (Overridden methods are simply inlined as private methods.) This might be an interesting option for PowerMock as the rebased class would behave like a Mockito mock by only changing one instruction of the DSL.

Just ping me if you need any help with this.

@raphw I was mostly speaking for the powermock development to plug-in behavior within mockito. Anyway regarding the byte code manipulation, bytebuddy might offer a compelling alternative to what is used now.