Yes, I think that's fine.  I think, though, that a timespec-comparator would be worth adding.

On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 8:21 PM <> wrote:
Isn't it just equal?

(timespec=? timespec1 timespec2)     →     timespec         (procedure)

        Compares two timespecs for exact equality.

Since timespecs are a pair of (seconds . nanoseconds), and this isn't an abstraction, just a natural hack to get around the sharing record types problem, do we need timespec=?, or will a comment that equal? will Do The Right Thing sufficient?

- Harold