If it is passed by reference I'd be less inclined (personal opinion) to think the reference is stored somewhere, while a pointer argument might be saved somewhere for some time.

A function invocation with reference looks the same as a function invocation with value, so on a quick glance, someone might think that the parameter will remain unchanged.

It is easy to convert a pass by value to a pass by reference (just put const &, vs changing all dots to arrows with pointers) to speed up a slow copy of a large object, so I may get the impression that that was the reason for using a reference when reading the code.

To talk about lifetimes, you need linear logic in the core language. Merely having destructors is not enough.

I didn't mean to imply that it couldn't, just that by using a reference instead of a pointer you are disclaiming responsibility for lifetime management of the referenced item since you can not delete a reference.

C++ being what it is, one can ref = *(new object());, delete &ref;, but the intention you are expressing by using a reference is more hands off in nature. It isn't retargetable, no built-in ability to new\delete, etc.