> I thought of that, but the use of "seconds" might suggest "current-second",
> which is a non-Posix count that includes leap seconds and is based on a
> specific epoch.  Given these things, you can construct a comparator if you
> need one, using timespec?, timespec=?, timespec<?, and timespec->inexact
> and then hashing the resulting float.

LGTM

> I guess adding timespec-hash
> wouldn't hurt; in the sample implementation for 128, floats are hashed with
> inexact->exact and abs.

timespec-hash would hash timespec objects and not ordinary floats?