Support per-record currency types

[kgodey]

Problem

Due to a misunderstanding in requirements, we accidentally ended up implementing a custom money type that can have a different currency in each record. Since we already have the backend for this, we might as well use it.

Proposed solution

We need a design for using the multi-currency money type. It's similar to the existing money type with the following changes:

• Users should be able to set and change the currency on a per-record basis. There should be a currency picker to allow them to select from existing currencies.
• Users should be able to set the default currency for a column as a display option. We will pre-fill this currency for them to avoid repetitive data entry.
• Users can set the decimal precision of a column as a display option, but cannot set it on a per-record basis.

Additional context

• Design for money data type #239
• Update design for money data type options #655
• Backend work for Mathesar money custom type  #417
• Add custom MATHESAR_TYPES.MONEY type #647

[seancolsen]

@kgodey

Users should be able to set and change the currency on a per-record basis

Is this still something that we want? I'd like to close this issue. We could waiti to take up any work like this until we have a clearer use case for it or a user requesting it.

we already have the backend for this

My understanding is that the backend does not support per-record currency types. Currency type is implemented as a display option, as far as I know. If I'm wrong, I'd like to understand this better.

[kgodey]

My understanding is that the backend does not support per-record currency types. Currency type is implemented as a display option, as far as I know. If I'm wrong, I'd like to understand this better.

The backend does support this, there was a misunderstanding about the original product spec, and this was implemented before we switched to the current money type. We decided to leave the older implementation as-is in case we wanted to support multi-currency money types in the future.

That being said, this was 2 years ago, and we're rearchitecting the backend now. I can't imagine the code is anything but a liability at this point. I'm fine with closing this, but I do think we should also delete the associated backend code so it's not a maintenance burden. Maybe track that in a separate issue? cc @mathemancer

[seancolsen]

Ok, I'm closing this then. Thanks for weighing in, @kgodey. I'll leave it to @mathemancer to open that separate issue as needed.