Premodern states would do this all the time. A ruler would find themselves strapped on cash, debase the (metal content based) currency, people slowly find out, raise their prices, rinse and repeat. Gresham's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law) states that when 'pure' and 'impure' coins are both in circulation, the impure currency takes over.

In medieval Europe they would do "recoinage". They would declare all the old coinage no longer legal tender (also outlaw hoarding and transacting with it or foreign currency). The mint would take all your old coins off your hands and give you back 75% as many new coins.

You could argue the Romans tried to by debasing their coins with inferior minerals to mint more of them at lower costs.

I mean, once a government starts literally printing money to solve their problems are they not then thoroughly corrupt and dictatorial? You kinda qualified your question into pointlessness ;)

Also, the exact process by which governments create money out of nothing (directly printing it, issuing bonds, changing the materials used for coins, changing numbers in a database, etc.) doesn't really matter, does it?

Ray Dalio explains this history in his books "How Countries Go Broke" and "Big Debt Crises".

His theory is that governments have a debt cycle, and printing money is just one point in that cycle.

The most famous historical example is Weimar Germany in 1923. To pay off massive World War I debts and striking workers, the government simply printed more money. Another classic example is Zimbabwe in 2008...