> there actually just isn't a well defined concept of next vector I think there is a well-defined next vector, it just isn't very useful. The next vector after

> there actually just isn't a well defined concept of next vector I think there is a well-defined next vector, it just isn't very useful. The next vector after [1] for a vector of unsigned integers would have to be [1, 0]. And then [1, 0, 0], [1, 0, 0, 0], etc. (For signed integers substitute T::MIN instead of 0.)