Is '*args' useful in this example code?

[Robert]

On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 9:26:47 PM UTC-5, Ben Finney wrote:
> Robert <rxjwg98 at gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > I understand now, but I feel the args usage is weird. I don't see any way 
> > to use *args and **kwargs in above code. What is your opinion on it?
> 
> Can you show example code that you would expect, and specifically what about
> the actual code doesn't match what you expect?
> 
> -- 
>  \        "Of course, everybody says they're for peace. Hitler was for |
>   `\      peace. Everybody is for peace. The question is: what kind of |
> _o__)                                peace?" --Noam Chomsky, 1984-05-14 |
> Ben Finney

Excuse me for the incomplete info previously. 
If I call it with 
a = f(3) 
the result is 12. It is correct as below message. That is no use of *args 
and **kwargs.

If I put more parameters in f, it will give errors as below.


///////////
%run "C:/Users/pyprj/ipython0/decor0.py"
f was called
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TypeError                                 Traceback (most recent call last)
C:\Users\pyprj\ipython0\decor0.py in <module>()
     11    return x + x * x
     12 
---> 13 a = f(3, 4)
     14 

C:\Users\pyprj\ipython0\decor0.py in with_logging(*args, **kwargs)
      3     def with_logging(*args, **kwargs):
      4         print func.__name__ + " was called"
----> 5         return func(*args, **kwargs)
      6     return with_logging
      7 

TypeError: f() takes exactly 1 argument (2 given) 

%run "C:/Users/rj/pyprj/ipython0/decor0.py"
f was called

a
Out[13]: 12
///////////

I don't see *args and **kwargs can be used by other way yet.
Do you think this internal function definition (with *args) is useful?

Thanks,