@lorepozo Yes! Allowing `super let` at function level for functions that basically place additional values in the caller's stack frame would be useful! Then a function could create an object (in the caller's frame) and return something that references it, like a safe pin() would need to.

That would need to be part of the function _signature_ though. I don't think we should (or can) allow any regular fn to start placing extra objects into the parent's scope.