I feel like if you just remove the spaces around the parens themselves, it's the most clear: ((a + b) / ((c - d) / e))
Nowhere I have worked would pass a code review for what you have proposed.
To answer your earlier question about object definitions, in cases where the objects are small, I do think more concise (single line) notation can be more readable. An example, though not a great one because it's data more than it's code:
items: [
{ type: "a", quantity: "12", price: 123.45 },
{ type: "b", quantity: "7", price: 456.78 },
{ type: "c", quantity: "3", price: 9.00 },
]
Another example: do you write { foo: bar, baz: bat, bing: bang } or:
{
foo: bar,
baz: bat,
bing: bang
}
Incidentally, I used to write code with no spaces between parens, which is what you suggested: ((a + b) / ((c - d) / e)), but eventually found it much easier to always put spaces around parens: ( ( a + b ) / ( ( c - d ) / e ) ). I would say this is similar to the indent-with-spaces-vs-tabs argument, which will rage forever.
The thing for me is my text editor visually matches the braces, so the second option makes that harder.
I prefer the noisier side as well. When adding parens to indicate/force precedence, I will sometimes split my expressions into multiple lines, with indentation, as an aid to legibility, e.g. instead of ( ( a + b ) / ( ( c - d ) / e ) ) I might write:
I've found this not only quite legible, but also fairly easy to edit because you can easily match parens visually.