Dangling comment not attach to any ast node

Steps to reproduce

esprima.parse('function foo() {return /*comment*/;}', { comment: true })

Expected output

{
  "type": "Program",
  "body": [
    {
      "type": "FunctionDeclaration",
      "id": {
        "type": "Identifier",
        "name": "foo"
      },
      "params": [],
      "body": {
        "type": "BlockStatement",
        "body": [
          {
            "type": "ReturnStatement",
            "argument": null,
            "danglingComments": ["comment"],  // attach to ReturnStatement ast node 
          }
        ]
      },
      "generator": false,
      "expression": false,
      "async": false
    }
  ],
  "sourceType": "script",
  "comments": [
    {
      "type": "Block",
      "value": "comment"
    }
  ]
}

Actual output

{
  "type": "Program",
  "body": [
    {
      "type": "FunctionDeclaration",
      "id": {
        "type": "Identifier",
        "name": "foo"
      },
      "params": [],
      "body": {
        "type": "BlockStatement",
        "body": [
          {
            "type": "ReturnStatement",
            "argument": null
          }
        ]
      },
      "generator": false,
      "expression": false,
      "async": false
    }
  ],
  "sourceType": "script",
  "comments": [
    {
      "type": "Block",
      "value": "comment"
    }
  ]
}

Here "comment" become a "dangling comment".

Relevant references

ReturnStatement:
    return ;

In this case, it's true that "comment" is out of both the leading and trailing range of ReturnStatement according to the specification but it will be more convenient if this comment be attached to the ast node.

Start with the supplied esprima.parse call and compare its actual AST with the requested ReturnStatement attachment for the comment. Determine the parser behavior for comments outside a node's leading or trailing range, then add coverage showing the comment is retained in the AST as requested.