The proof of commutativity for addition of natural numbers has been used as a simple pedagogical example in some places, including the Wikipedia page for Coq. It is a bit longer than just "Hello World" but it is an example that is about as simple as one can imagine for a proof, while still remaining non-trivial. This is what the codeproof term (quoted from the Wikipedia page) would look like for Coq:
plus_comm =
fun n m : nat =>
nat_ind (fun n0 : nat => n0 + m = m + n0)
(plus_n_0 m)
(fun (y : nat) (H : y + m = m + y) =>
eq_ind (S (m + y))
(fun n0 : nat => S (y + m) = n0)
(f_equal S H)
(m + S y)
(plus_n_Sm m y)) n
: forall n m : nat, n + m = m + n
However, Coq users rarely write such proof terms directly. Rather, they prove theorems with tactics. Here is a tactic-based proof of the same theorem (leading to a slightly different proof term):
Lemma plus_comm : forall n m, n + m = m + n.
intros; induction n.
- simpl.
symmetry.
apply Nat.add_0_r.
- simpl.
rewrite Nat.add_succ_r.
f_equal.
apply IHn.
Qed.