[racket] Macro question - `let' without inferring name?

Hi,

I'm wondering if there's any way to have a macro like

(define-syntax (m stx)
  (syntax-case stx ()
    [(m expr)
     #'(let ([t expr])
         ;; ....
         t)]))

that binds expr to t, does some things, and then somehow returns t -- but with whatever name would have been inferred for expr without the let, and not 't' (if that makes sense?)

Thanks,
Erik