feat(docs): text receivers are more expensive than binary ones (#3377)

Author: novusnota

docs/src/content/docs/book/receive.mdx

@@ -50,6 +50,8 @@ In a contract, the order of declaration of receivers has no effect on how receiv
 
 Contracts are not required to declare receivers for all possible message types. If a contract does not have a receiver for a specific message type, the message will be processed by the next receiver that matches the message type in the receiver execution order list. For example, if we remove the receiver `receive("message"){:tact}` in the above contract, then when a message with the comment `"message"{:tact}` arrives, it will be processed by `receive(str: String){:tact}`.
 
+Processing and distinguishing the text receivers, like the comment receiver `receive("..."){:tact}` and the string receiver `receive(str: String){:tact}`, costs significantly more gas than processing binary ones, such as `receive(){:tact}` or `receive(msg: MyMessage){:tact}`. Thus, it is recommended to [prefer binary receivers to text receivers](/book/gas-best-practices#prefer-binary-receivers-to-text-receivers).
+
 Note that the receiver `receive(msg: Slice){:tact}` acts as a fallback that catches all messages that did not match previous receivers in the execution order list.
 
 If there is no receiver to process a message type and the fallback receiver `receive(msg: Slice){:tact}` is not declared, the transaction will fail with exit code [130](/book/exit-codes/#130).