This is how it looks in Hylang because it maps onto Python semantics.

  (for [element (range 1 10)]
    (print element)
    (if (= element 5)
      (break)))

I prefer this over Common Lisp because it looks shamelessly imperative.

are you sure you have ever used Common Lisp? Maybe you were thinking about a different language.

  CL-USER 51 > (loop for element from 1 upto 10 do
                     (print element)
                     (if (= element 5)
                         (return)))

  1 
  2 
  3 
  4 
  5 
  NIL

I have not used CL. I was horrified by the loop macro infact because I jumped from C to CL.

I definitely made a stupid mistake of clubbing CL with scheme and clojure but in those languages they avoid these imperative features.

I have made other points as well which makes Hylang different from the rest.

1. Hylang is a transpiler. Don't compare it with other lisps. Sibilant and Liskell are others in the same league.

2. Hylang has more useful libraries than all the other lisps.

3. Right now, I find Hylang best suited to write good old imperative dirty scripts that get stuff done. If you have used Python, Ruby, Perl ... it's practically heaven.

4. I stress the imperative part again because ... because that's my stupidity of choice. I'm a scripting guy! I'm familiar with that stuff. The best part of lisp for me is not the macros. It's that I don't have to google for syntax that often and "-" beats the "_" for variable names.

5. ipdb works too!

> I was horrified by the loop macro infact because I jumped from C to CL.

But you are aware that the FOR loop code you posted looks almost exactly like the LOOP FOR code in Common Lisp?