I have some custom settings to send custom message in chat after few seconds. Because, the system is multilanguage and multicountry, I need to send messages in the customer's language. Is it possible to put a custom label in a field of a custom settings? I don't need any code, it's all done in standard pages.
Is there a way to combine custom settings with custom labels ? So that the output from a setting value would be a custom label ?   To explain:  In example, we have an international organisation, and say countries are stored as an ISO code. As this is a limited and stable set of data, using custom settings would be the appropriate way to deal with say the full country name.   The issue arises when I do not just want to store the English country name, but want to have it translatable, presenting the right translation depending on the user's locale. Now, this is the point where I'd like to integrate custom settings with custom labels.  So that say the custom setting with name 'some iso code' doesn't return the full country name, but Label.Country'some iso code', which is than automatically translated in the right version.   Sounds good right. But as custom settings are fixed to certain types, as far as I've gotten is put the label name in the settings as a string value. And then .. i'm stuck :).  No way to cast a string to a Custom label, or have it be interpreted (and translated) as such, or is there ?   I'm aware this can be done in a custom object &amp; apex, I was hoping for a more automated, "cleaner", less resource consuming way, better integrated, configurable way.  Additional clarrification: *The goal is to extend the use of custom labels (translation workbench), by adding a mapping from any data-based value to a custom label.*   While we could do a long matching process in apex, it would be faster &amp; neater if the custom settings mechanism could be used. There are disadvantaged to custom objects, they require soql &amp; apex, while custom settings &amp; custom labels are cached. They too can be used in many other places. Countries were an example, I'd use this mechanism for every variable value that needs to be translatable.
I see ads to other SE sites regularly on the sidebar of SO. Are these questions chosen by hand, or algorithmically? The reason I ask is that there was an ad pointing to  on Seasoned Advice. I'm all for a good laugh I suppose, but is this the kind of question that should be highlighted?  It's obviously a thriving community, but if this were my first exposure to that community, and I saw that the highest-rated answer -- from the user with the highest reputation -- was (and I paraphrase only lightly):  &quot;Why yes, there is tool that can cut cherry tomatoes in half.  It's fantastic for the job.  It's called a freakin' KNIFE!&quot;  would I ever want to visit again, let alone ask a question over there? First impressions count for a lot, and that one missed the mark IMHO. If the selection method is algorithmic, I suppose there's no reliable way to detect sarcasm in a highly-rated answer, but if it's manual, weeeellllllllll ... :) Question about probable fixed use of "what do you do?" and "how do you do?" Do we always have to use the question how do you do? fixed in greeting people? Can we ask it in other situations rather than greetings? Like when we are wondering how someone is doing the given task.  Do we always have to use the question what do you do? for asking about sojeone's job? Can we use it sonetimes instead of ** what are you doing?** How can I get more of this macro photo in focus? How could Luke hide from Vader during the duel on Death Star II? In Return of the Jedi, Vader throws his lightsaber at Luke causing the catwalk come crashing down. Luke uses this in his advantage and hides from him under the throne room platform. Unable to locate his son, Vader tried to lure Luke out of hiding.  But how could Luke conceal himself from Vader in the first place? Did he use a Force power of some kind to blur Vader's sensors? I mean, the underneath of the platform was pretty much an open space with very little possibilities for hiding. The only places I see in the movie are the openings on the both sides of the floor (pointed by the yellow arrows):    The background of a close-up to Luke doesn't give much of a clue (although there is a round shape which could be the bottom of a window frame):    But as Luke reveals himself, he appears to be beneath of the staircase to the dais, right in the middle of it:    There's no way he could have hidden there all the time, because just a couple of seconds before, Vader walked towards and stared at the very same spot:    My first ideas were that Luke used the Force to make himself invisible, or to teleport him to the position. But after taking a look at one of the cross sections of the Emperor's throne room, I assume Luke could have slid almost straight under the floor of the lower level (yellow arrow) and then later  back to the staircase (although we don't see it in the movie, and I'm not sure if Luke knew the ability):    Does someone know better? Read data from Excel file in Objective-C (iPhone) Is there any true inertial reference frame in the universe? Is there any true  in the universe?  Newton's first law states that an object at rest remains at rest, and an object performing uniform motion performs uniform motion, until and unless acted upon by an external force, if viewed from an inertial frame. It is the definition of an inertial frame of reference. And Newton's second law states that the net external force acting on a particle equals its mass times its acceleration. Thus we need to have an inertial frame in order for Newton's 1st and 2nd laws to be applicable.  Scientists claim that Earth is an inertial frame, either the  frame or the  frame.  Why is that? Earth's different parts have different accelerations when it performs rotational motion about its axis. Now you may say that Earth's axis is inertial, but the Earth is also revolving around the Sun. Thus Earth's frame should be non-inertial.  Even supposing that earth's frame is inertial, then it means that rest of the universe is non-inertial, because only a frame that moves with constant velocity with respect to an inertial frame is also an inertial frame and according to various scientific experiments there is no other matter in this universe which satisfies that criterion. Now you may say that earth is an approximate inertial frame, but still, my question is: is there any perfect inertial frame in the universe where Newton's laws are exactly applicable? What is the Python equivalent of Perl's chomp function, which removes the last character of a string if it is a newline? For quite some time now I have been asking myself how the world of Game of Thrones is shaped and if the people living in that world know the shape.   In questions here on SciFi.Stackexchange concerning the unnatural seasons or the definition of a year in Westeros, it is often  that the Westerosi can measure the duration of a revolution of their planet around the sun. But that only works if they know that they actually live on a planet.   In  answer it was said that people have been travelling in ships around the world. However, I cannot remember any passage in the books supporting this. Actually I only remember evidence for the opposite:    During the  on the Iron Islands, there is a man called  who promises the Ironborn treasures from lands far to the west, if they elect him as king. However, the POV character of that chapter (I think it was Victarion Greyjoy) does not believe him and sees the madness in Gylbert's eyes - as if speaking of travelling west is crazy.  Later when he leads the attack against the Shield Islands, the Iron Fleet travels out of sight of the coast line. This manoeuvre is considered very dangerous and risky. If this is already dangerous, traveling even further west appears close to suicide.   In addition, there was a  who sailed to the far west and never returned.   establishes that the world is not a hollow world, but is not conclusive as to whether it is a planet.  Is there any evidence in the books that the World of Ice and Fire is a planet? Was it established that the Westerosi know the nature of their world? Should 'Hi', 'thanks', taglines, and salutations be removed from posts? I edit a lot of posts every day. I often run across posts with 'Hi' and 'Thanks' on the top and the bottom of the post respectively. I also run across things like:     --User   Should these items be removed during the editing of the post by an editor? Combine or rebase an arbitrarily large number of commits Automatically convert quotations in the form of "abc" to become ``abc" What do the X and Y axis stand for in the Fourier transform domain? Proper fstab entry to mount a samba share on boot? Solution of equation $\frac{x\cdot 2014^{\frac{1}{x}}+\frac{1}{x}\cdot 2014^x}{2} = 2014$ Solution of equation $\displaystyle \frac{x\cdot 2014^{\frac{1}{x}}+\frac{1}{x}\cdot 2014^x}{2} = 2014$   $\bf{My\; Try::}$ Clearly Here $x&gt;0$, Now Using $\bf{A.M\geq G.M}$  So Here $\displaystyle x\cdot 2014^{\frac{1}{x}}&gt;0$ and $\displaystyle \frac{1}{x}\cdot 2014^x&gt;0$ .  So $\displaystyle \left(\frac{x\cdot 2014^{\frac{1}{x}}+\frac{1}{x}\cdot 2014^x}{2}\right)\geq \left(x\cdot 2014^{\frac{1}{x}}\cdot \frac{1}{x}\cdot 2014^x\right)^{\frac{1}{2}} = \sqrt{2014^{\left(x+\frac{1}{x}\right)}} = 2014$   And equality Hold , When $\displaystyle x = \frac{1}{x}\Rightarrow x= 1$  Can we solve it  without Using $\bf{A.M\geq G.M}$  If Yes, Then please explain me.  Thanks Continuous extension of a real function Related;    This is the theorem i need to prove;  "Let $E(\subset \mathbb{R})$ be closed subset and $f:E\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be a contiuous function. Then there exists a continuous function $g:\mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ such that $g(x)=f(x), \forall x\in E$."  I have tried hours to prove this, but couldn't. I found some solutions, but ridiculously all are wrong. Every solution states that "If $x\in E$ and $x$ is not an interior point of $E$, then $x$ is an endpoint of a segment of at most countable collection of disjoint segments.". However, this is indeed false! (Check Arthur's argument in the link above)  Wrong solution Q4.5;    Just like the argument in this solution, i can see that $g$ is continuous on $E^c$ and $Int(E)$. But how do i show that $g$ is continuous on $E$? Files greater than 1 GB and older than 6 months I want to find files which are greater than 1 GB and older than 6 months in entire server. How to write a command for this? My passport was detached from the front cover but all the pages are intact. what shall i do? Examples of topologies in which all open sets are regular? An open subset U of a space X is regular if it equals the interior of its closure, as we learn from the Wikipedia . Furthermore, the regular open subsets of a space (any space) form a complete Boolean algebra.  I'm coming to this from logic and algebra, with not much background in topology. I can't figure out which topologies have "interesting" collections of regular open sets. For example, in the trivial topology and the discrete topology, every open set is regular, if I'm not mistaken. Those are not "interesting" topologies. I assume there are other topologies in which the space X and the null set are the only regular open sets. If so, those aren't "interesting" either, at least not with regard to their regular open ets.  I believe what I'm looking for is topologies in which every open set is regular, other than the ones I've just described.  Thanks for any help. Calculating projected area of polygons with field calculator in ArcMap? To prove $\left|\frac{p_n(z)}{q_m(z)}\right|\leq \frac{M}{|z|^{m-n}}$ for some $M>0$