Cleanup use of dfcc_wrapper_programt::addr_of_*

[tautschnig]

We don't need to take local copies of expressions that are declared const at class level.

• Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
• n/a Methods or procedures I have added are documented, following the guidelines provided in CODING_STANDARD.md.
• n/a The feature or user visible behaviour I have added or modified has been documented in the User Guide in doc/cprover-manual/
• Regression or unit tests are included, or existing tests cover the modified code (in this case I have detailed which ones those are in the commit message).
• n/a My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
• My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
• n/a White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 78.78% and project coverage change: +0.09 🎉

Comparison is base (8468683) 78.42% compared to head (28beb6e) 78.51%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #7688      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    78.42%   78.51%   +0.09%     
===========================================
  Files         1674     1674              
  Lines       191956   191950       -6     
===========================================
+ Hits        150545   150717     +172     
+ Misses       41411    41233     -178     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
.../contracts/dynamic-frames/dfcc_wrapper_program.cpp	96.32% <78.78%> (-0.78%)	⬇️

... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.