Question about correct typesetting

Question

I have a mathematical exercise written in LaTeX and it seems ugly to me. It is ok to ask what would be the best (and most beautiful) way to typeset it?

The exercise in question is the following:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[top=0.7in, bottom=1.2in, left=0.8in, right=0.8in]{geometry}
\usepackage{parskip}
\setlength{\parindent}{0cm}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{unicode-math}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage[greek,english]{babel}
\setmainfont[Ligatures=TeX, Extension=.otf, UprightFont=*, BoldFont=*Bold, ItalicFont=*It, BoldItalicFont=*BoldIt, Mapping=tex-text]{GFSArtemisia}

\setsansfont[Mapping=tex-text]{GFSArtemisia.otf}
\setmathfont{latinmodern-math.otf}
\setmathfont[range=\varnothing]{Asana-Math.otf}
\setmathfont[range=\int]{latinmodern-math.otf}

\begin{document}

\begin{align*}
  &\frac{d H}{d p}= -(1-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p+\epsilon)\log(p-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p-a\cdot p+\epsilon)-a\cdot \log(a)-\\
  &(1-p+2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p+a\cdot p-\epsilon-a)\log (1-p+2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p+a\cdot p-\epsilon-a)=\\
  &=-(1-e\cdot \epsilon-a)\log(p-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p-a\cdot p+\epsilon)-\\
  &(1-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p-a\cdot p)\cdot\frac{1}{-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p-a\cdot p+\epsilon}\cdot (1-2\cdot \epsilon-a)-\\
  &(-1+2\cdot \epsilon+a)\log(1-p-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p+a\cdot p-\epsilon-a)-\\
  &(1-p-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p+a\cdot p-\epsilon-a)\cdot \frac{1}{1-p+2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p+a\cdot p- \epsilon-a}\cdot (-1+2\cdot \epsilon+a)=\\
  &-(1-2\cdot \epsilon -a)\log(p-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p-a\cdot p+\epsilon)-(1-2\cdot \epsilon-a)-\\
  &(-1+2\cdot \epsilon+a)\log(1-p+2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p+a\cdot p-\epsilon-a)-(-1+2\cdot \epsilon+a)=\\
  &-(1-2\cdot \epsilon-a)[\log(p-2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p-a\cdot p+\epsilon)+\log(1-p+2\cdot \epsilon\cdot p+a\cdot p-\epsilon-a)]
\end{align*}

\end{document}

Answer 1

Phrasing a question to request a "best way" to typeset something is subjective, since "best" for me is different from "best" for someone else, in my opinion. This goes for the actual code or the rendered output. The same goes for something that "looks ugly" as beauty is in the eye of the be(er)holder. Therefore I typically associate such questions as being "primarily opinion-based" - one of the suggested reasons for closure:

I would much rather see someone show something they consider "ugly" and then also show what they've done to suggest a "more beautiful" presentation as opposed to purely making a "this looks ugly; make it look better" request. That may point solutions into a specific direction and be more focussed and perhaps factual.